Port Angeles Attorney Lane Wolfley Sued for Malpractice and Fraud

Longtime Clallam County attorney Lane Wolfley and his firm, Wolfley & Wolfley, P.S., have been named as defendants in a lawsuit alleging legal malpractice, fraud, and the misappropriation of client funds.

The Complaint, filed in Clallam County Superior Court by plaintiff Kimberly Pritchard, accuses Wolfley of mishandling a $1 million medical malpractice settlement, taking unauthorized fees, and engaging in deceptive financial practices.

In a formal response filed on November 21, 2025, Wolfley and his legal team denied the allegations of wrongdoing.

The case is assigned to Judge Elizabeth Stanley.

Allegations of Bait and Switch

According to court documents, Pritchard alleges that she originally retained Wolfley to assist with a medical malpractice claim against Olympic Medical Center and Dr. Stephan D. Bush following a 2018 surgery that allegedly caused her permanent injuries.

The lawsuit alleges that prior to hiring Wolfley, Pritchard had already received a settlement offer of $1 million from the medical providers. The complaint claims Wolfley induced Pritchard to hire him by promising he could secure a larger settlement and by guaranteeing her a loan to prevent a pending foreclosure on her home.

Pritchard alleges Wolfley instructed her to keep the loan secret because of his history of bar discipline for loaning money to clients.

Despite filing a lawsuit on her behalf, the complaint states that Wolfley eventually advised Pritchard to accept the same $1 million offer he had previously disparaged, telling her that “no jury in Clallam County would ever grant an amount greater than that.”

Fee Dispute and Missing Funds

A central allegation in the suit concerns the legal fees Wolfley charged. Pritchard claims she signed a contingency fee agreement stipulating Wolfley would receive 18% of the recovery if the case settled before trial. However, after the settlement was reached through mediation, Wolfley allegedly attempted to have Pritchard sign a backdated agreement raising his fee to 33%.

When Pritchard refused to sign the new agreement, the lawsuit alleges Wolfley unilaterally retained the higher amount—approximately $330,000—rather than the agreed-upon 18%.

Pritchard further alleges that Wolfley delayed disbursing the remaining funds to her, ignored her phone calls, and commingled her settlement money with his own. When he finally issued a check to Pritchard for $60,000 in August 2022, the lawsuit claims it bounced due to insufficient funds in his trust account.

“That necessarily means Mr. Wolfley misappropriated part of her money,” the Amended Complaint asserts.

Formerly Suspended By The Bar Association

The current allegations of financial impropriety are not Wolfley’s first encounter with professional discipline. In June 2005, the Washington State Supreme Court suspended Wolfley from the practice of law for three years following a disciplinary investigation that uncovered sexual misconduct with a client, dishonesty under oath, and improper financial dealings.

According to the Stipulation to Discipline filed by the Washington State Bar Association, Wolfley admitted to engaging in sexual misconduct with a client he was representing in a personal injury matter in late 2002. The records state that Wolfley knowingly made sexual advances toward the client, including kissing and fondling her, despite the absence of any consensual relationship prior to his legal representation.

Compounding the misconduct, Wolfley initially lied to the Bar Association during its investigation. In a written response to the grievance, he characterized his relationship with the client as merely “friendly and flirtatious” and denied any romantic inclinations or inappropriate touching. He repeated these falsehoods under oath during a deposition in September 2003, testifying that he had never touched the client’s breasts or buttocks. Wolfley later stipulated that this testimony was knowingly false after video evidence from the client’s home confirmed he had engaged in “intimate physical contact” with her.

The 2005 suspension also addressed improper financial entanglements with clients—an issue that echoes the allegations in the current Pritchard lawsuit. The WSBA found that Wolfley violated professional conduct rules by providing financial assistance to two separate clients.

Wolfley stipulated to the three-year suspension. A copy of the stipulation is available here.

Previously Sued For Malpractice

In November 2001, another malpractice lawsuit was filed against Wolfley and his then-firm, Wolfley, Basden & Hansen, P.S., by Robert and Patricia Stark.

The plaintiffs alleged that Wolfley advised them that a commercial lease agreement they held with tenants in Forks, Washington, was invalid or capable of rescission. Allegedly relying on Wolfley’s advice, the Starks moved out of the premises, only to be sued by their landlords for breach of contract.

The Starks alleged that Wolfley “fell below the standard of care expected of attorneys practicing law in the State of Washington” by providing the erroneous advice that led to their legal exposure.

The 2001 case was eventually dismissed without prejudice in June 2003 for “want of prosecution,” meaning the case was closed only because no action of record had been taken by either party for over 12 months, rather than a ruling on the merits of the malpractice claim.

Notably, the 2001 lawsuit highlights a long-standing professional and personal relationship between Wolfley and current Clallam County Superior Court Judge Brent Basden.

Court records show that Basden acted as the defense attorney for Wolfley in the malpractice suit, filing the Notice of Appearance on behalf of the firm and his partner.

While Judge Basden is not a party to the current Pritchard lawsuit, the historical connection places Wolfley firmly within the established legal circles of Clallam County—a dynamic the Pritchard complaint alludes to when mentioning Wolfley’s comments about what a local jury would or would not grant.

Legal Claims and Defense

The current malpractice lawsuit brought by Pritchard, seeks damages for multiple claims, including legal malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, fraud, conversion, and violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act.

Pritchard is seeking the return of unauthorized fees, compensation for financial and emotional distress, and treble damages under consumer protection laws.

In their Answer to the Amended Complaint, Wolfley and his firm admitted to the existence of an attorney-client relationship but denied the specific allegations of fraud, conversion, and malpractice.

The case is currently proceeding in Clallam County Superior Court. A copy of the Complaint is available here.