Washington Solicitor General Noah Purcell faces an ethics complaint from the Washington State Bar Association (WSBA) for alleged misconduct involving direct communications with law firm Perkins Coie without consent from its legal representative and for using public resources to respond to a separate complaint involving Attorney General Nick Brown.
The complaint, filed August 23, centers on emails exchanged in March between Purcell and attorneys at Perkins Coie. These discussions involved the drafting and timing of an amicus brief supporting the firm’s lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s executive order to cancel federal contracts and revoke the firm’s security clearance. The amicus brief, later signed by Brown and Deputy Solicitor General Emma Grunberg, was submitted the day after Perkins Coie filed for a temporary restraining order, which the court ultimately granted.
Purcell, a former Perkins Coie attorney, did not sign the brief but coordinated communications with the firm, bypassing Williams & Connolly—the law firm officially representing Perkins Coie in the case. Records obtained through a public disclosure request show no communication between the Washington Attorney General’s Office (AGO) and Williams & Connolly, raising potential violations of Washington’s Rule of Professional Conduct prohibiting attorneys from contacting a represented party without consent from that party’s counsel.
The complaint alleges that these actions circumvented the litigation counsel of record and lacked proper authorization. “Even if some recipients were lawyers, there is no indication [Williams & Connolly] consented to direct contacts or designated those individuals as litigation counsel,” it states.
In a related matter, Purcell also responded to a separate WSBA disciplinary complaint against Attorney General Brown, which stemmed from the failure to disclose that Perkins Coie had 10 active contracts with the AGO at the time of the amicus filing. The WSBA had threatened Brown with interim suspension for initially failing to respond. Purcell authored the response on AGO letterhead, raising additional concerns about the misuse of public resources for a personal legal matter.
The ethics complaint argues that Purcell’s dual role—as a material witness in the amicus brief coordination and as Brown’s advocate in the bar complaint—creates a serious conflict of interest. “Acting as an advocate and representing the respondent attorney in the related disciplinary matter would be improper,” it states.
WSBA officials declined to comment on the specifics but confirmed that direct contact with a represented party can be unethical, depending on the details. Williams & Connolly’s lead counsel on the case, Dane Butswinkas, has not responded to inquiries about whether he authorized any such communication.
The complaint raises significant questions about professional boundaries, the appropriate use of state resources, and potential conflicts of interest within the Washington Attorney General’s Office, just as Brown continues to face mounting scrutiny over his office’s ties to Perkins Coie.
