Washington attorney Kerry P. Zeiler suspended for two years, with three-year probation

The Washington State Supreme Court has placed attorney Kerry P. Zeiler on indefinite suspension, aligning with a reciprocal disciplinary ruling originally issued by the California Supreme Court. The formal order, entered on January 22, 2026, mandates a three-year probationary term, during which Zeiler must serve at least the initial two years under active suspension.

This reciprocal action enforces the terms of a June 11, 2025, California order, which followed an investigation into Zeiler’s conduct involving a Los Angeles-based special needs trust.

The Washington State Bar Association had advocated for a more severe outcome, filing a motion for disbarment on September 10, 2025. After Zeiler submitted both an objection and a follow-up response, the court declined to disbar him, instead adopting the less stringent suspension previously imposed in California.

The disciplinary proceedings originated in part from Zeiler’s role concerning the Youngje Cho Irrevocable Special Needs Trust in Los Angeles County. His involvement in the trust’s administration drew scrutiny, ultimately leading to findings of professional misconduct.

Before Zeiler can regain full practice rights in both states, he must fulfill several court-ordered conditions:

  • Provide restitution of $52,212 to the Youngje Cho Special Needs Trust, with interest accruing at 10 percent annually, dating back to April 3, 2019.
  • Disburse $1,500 to the Los Angeles County Superior Court as sanctions related to the trust’s probate matter.
  • Remit $2,500 to the State Bar of California’s Client Security Fund to cover monetary sanctions.
  • Submit documentation verifying professional rehabilitation, competency in general legal practice, and successful completion of the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination.

Zeiler’s suspension in Washington took effect seven days after the January 22 order. His reinstatement remains contingent upon full fulfillment of all conditions outlined in the California En Banc ruling.