MAGAZINE
California Lawyer
A wide selection of products for health, where specialists will answer any of your questions buying viagra in usa here such follow-up support of our customers is a priority of our work. We suggest to familiarize with a large assortment of products for personal care and health promotion resources buying cialis online often, in search of their medications, people are faced with the lack of necessary goods. We can provide you all the necessary information relating to your preparation, and more how cialis for sale online very low prices, the operator called back quickly to confirm your order.
November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014

DISBARMENT

Michael I. Berry, State Bar #141993, Los Angeles (August 14, 2013). Michael Ian Berry, State Bar # 141993, Los Angeles (August 14). Berry, 51, was disbarred for failing to competently perform legal services, failing to communicate, failing to render appropriate accounts, improperly withdrawing from representation, failing to return client papers, failing to refund unearned fees, and failing to comply with conditions to a previous order of discipline.

In aggravation, Berry had a record of prior discipline. He committed multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed his clients. Also, he showed indifference toward rectification of or atonement for his misconduct. In mitigation, Berry cooperated by entering into a stipulation. The order took effect September 13, 2013

Patricia J. Escobar, State Bar #165758, Woodland Hills (August 14, 2013). Escobar, 56, was disbarred for failing to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court and failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so. The order took effect September 13, 2013
George Holland, Jr., State Bar #216735, Oakland (August 14, 2013). Holland, 45, was disbarred for failing to competently perform legal services, creating a scheme to defraud, making financial arrangements with nonlawyers, sharing legal fees with nonlawyers, aiding in the unauthorized practice of law, charging and collecting unconscionable fees, commingling funds, maintaining unjust actions, failing to inform clients of significant developments in their cases, appearing for a party without authority, failing to respond to client inquiries, failing to release client files, failing to refund unearned fees, failing to report sanctions to the State Bar, and committing acts of moral turpitude. Holland was ordered to pay $34,948 plus interest in restitution.

Holland was the principal of the Holland Law Firm. Working with a group of nonlawyers calling itself American Recourse LLC, he participated in a foreclosure-rescue scheme to defraud distressed Filipino-American homeowners. Many of the nonlawyers were of Filipino descent and spoke Tagalog.

From June 2009 through July 2011, Holland was the attorney of record in more than 200 matters. After homeowners attended a seminar about ways to avoid foreclosure, they would meet with Holland to enter into legal-services agreements for prosecution of lender lawsuits. He failed to meet with the clients before matters were filed, failed to review the client files, and failed to make an independent assessment regarding the merits of the clients’ claims. Although some clients had valid claims, Holland filed numerous cases only to generate fees, which he split with the nonlawyers. The clients made monthly payments, so Holland maintained cases for as long as possible while performing little work. Most of the cases eventually were dismissed, and Holland failed to notify clients of the dismissals. There were eight client matters involving similar conduct that warranted discipline.

In aggravation, Holland committed multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed his clients. He showed indifference toward rectification of or atonement for his misconduct. Also, he failed to cooperate with the investigation and proceedings. In mitigation, Holland had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the State Bar in 2001. The order took effect September 13, 2013

Lauren S. Hurr, State Bar #253170, Winnetka (July 31, 2013). Hurr, 38, was disbarred for failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so. She was charged with failing to competently perform legal services, failing to promptly respond to status inquiries, failing to keep clients informed of significant developments, failing to render appropriate accounts, failing to promptly refund unearned fees, failing to return client files, and committing an act of moral turpitude. She was ordered to pay $2,500 plus interest in restitution.

In July 2011 Hurr filed an amended Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan proposing to increase her clients’ monthly payments without discussing the plan with them. She also failed to attend a confirmation hearing, and she did not inform her clients that their bankruptcy petition had been dismissed. The order took effect August 30, 2013

Nazareth V. Jansezian, State Bar #193159, Sierra Madre (August 14, 2013). Jansezian, 44, was disbarred for failing to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court, holding himself out as entitled to practice law while not an active member of the State Bar, charging and collecting illegal fees, failing to cooperate in a disciplinary matter, and committing an act involving moral turpitude, dishonesty, or corruption.

In 2010 Jansezian was suspended for 30 days and placed on one year of probation. Conditions to the discipline required him to take and pass the Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam (MPRE) within one year. In January 2012 he was suspended for failing to show proof of passing the MPRE.

In April 2012 a client retained Jansezian to file a bankruptcy petition and paid him $1,500 in advance fees. Jansezian failed to file the bankruptcy petition, and the client subsequently asked for a refund of unearned fees. Jansezian failed to provide a refund until February 2013, after disciplinary charges had been filed against him.

In aggravation, Jansezian had a record of prior discipline. His misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused significant harm to his client. In mitigation, Jansezian entered into a stipulation. The order took effect September 13, 2013

James S. Partridge, State Bar #136207, Castro Valley (August 7, 2013). Partridge, 54, was disbarred for failing to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court and failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so.

In aggravation, Partridge had a record of prior discipline. The order took effect September 9, 2013

Ronald G. Peake, State Bar #193868, Redondo Beach (August 7, 2013). Peake, 59, was disbarred for failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so. He was charged with failing to competently perform legal services, failing to respond to a client’s inquiries, failing to return a client’s file, failing to refund unearned fees, improperly withdrawing from representation, and failing to comply with conditions to a previous order of discipline.

In aggravation, Peake had a record of prior discipline. Also, he failed to cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation and proceedings. The order took effect September 6, 2013

Karl W. Schoth, State Bar #113572, Glendora (August 14, 2013). Schoth, 58, was disbarred for failing to maintain client funds in trust and committing acts of moral turpitude.

In 2000 Schoth was hired by a client to prepare a will and living trust. When the client died in 2005, Schoth represented her son in his petition to be appointed executor of the estate. When the client’s home was sold, Schoth deposited $173,692 into his client trust account (CTA) to hold until the assets of the estate could be properly disbursed. After paying $57,545 of the estate’s obligations, Schoth was required to maintain $117,352 in the CTA. However, by October 2009 the funds in the CTA fell to $1,760. Schoth used the funds for his own benefit. By January 2011 Schoth had paid the beneficiaries all the funds in the estate.

In four other cases, Schoth failed to maintain adequate funds in his CTA. While he paid funds due to his clients, he delayed paying lienholders and used funds for his own benefit.

In aggravation, Schoth committed multiple acts of wrongdoing. Also, his misconduct involved bad faith, dishonesty, and concealment, and it significantly harmed his clients. In mitigation, Schoth had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the State Bar in 1984. He also cooperated with the State Bar in its investigation, and ten witnesses testified to his good character. The order took effect September 13, 2013

Raymond V. Patton, State Bar #196791, Brentwood (July 31, 2013). Patton, 42, was disbarred for failing to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court and failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so.

In aggravation, Patton had a record of prior discipline. The order took effect August 30, 2013

SUSPENSION

Jack K. Conway, State Bar #45063, San Marino (July 31, 2013). Conway, 83, was suspended for two years and placed on three years of probation for failing to maintain client funds in trust, misappropriating funds, and failing to comply with conditions to a previous order of discipline.

In 2004 Conway was hired on a contingency-fee basis to represent a client in a personal injury matter. In 2007 the matter settled for $15,000. After subtracting his fees and costs, Conway was required to maintain approximately $9,627 in his client trust account. Between May 2007 and February 2008 Conway misappropriated $9,555 of the settlement funds. He has since made full restitution with interest.

In a second matter, in 2011 Conway entered into a stipulation concerning a private reproval. He was required to submit written quarterly reports and to take and pass the Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam (MPRE). He failed to timely file two quarterly reports, and he failed to pass the MPRE.

In aggravation, Conway had a record of prior discipline. Also, his misconduct caused financial harm to a client. In mitigation, Conway paid restitution without the threat of force or disciplinary, civil, or criminal proceedings, and he cooperated with the State Bar by entering into a stipulation. The order took effect August 30, 2013

Sean Donrad, State Bar #242665, Piedmont (August 14, 2013). Donrad, 45, was suspended for one year and placed on two years of probation for failing to competently perform legal services, engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, misleading a judge, failing to inform clients of significant developments, failing to render appropriate accounts, failing to return unearned fees, and committing an act of moral turpitude.

In 2009 Donrad was hired by a client to oppose a motion to set aside a default and to obtain a final judgment in a marital dissolution matter. The client agreed to pay a nonrefundable retainer of $3,800. Thereafter, Donrad failed to perform any legal services of value. He failed to file a proper substitution of attorney form or to make any court appearances. He also failed to respond to the motion to set aside the default. Moreover, Donrad did not contact opposing counsel to obtain a final judgment of marital dissolution. As a result, the client terminated Donrad’s representation and repeatedly requested an accounting and refund of unearned fees. Donrad failed to respond, and the client eventually paid another attorney more than $12,000 to complete his divorce.

In a second matter, in June 2010 Donrad filed a civil complaint on behalf of a client seeking the return of homeowner association dues. However, in January 2011 Donrad was enrolled inactive and became ineligible to practice law following his default in a prior disciplinary case. Donrad knew of his ineligibility, but he never told his client about the change in status. Donrad then failed to appear at a hearing on the opposing party’s motion to strike the complaint. The client’s case ultimately was dismissed.

In aggravation, Donrad had a record of prior discipline. He committed multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused harm to clients. Also, he showed indifference toward rectification of or atonement for his misconduct. In mitigation, Donrad presented four character witnesses. The order took effect September 13, 2013

Robert M. French, State Bar #98654, Sherman Oaks (August 14, 2013). French, 57, was suspended for 30 days and placed on two years of probation for disobeying a court order, failing to report sanctions, and failing to cooperate in a disciplinary investigation.

In February 2012 French was ordered to pay $7,000 in sanctions for filing a frivolous motion on his client’s behalf in a marital dissolution matter. French received the order and did not seek to modify or vacate it. The State Bar was advised of the sanctions by the court. However, French did not pay any portion of the sanctions or report the sanctions to the State Bar. When a State Bar investigator sent letters inquiring about the matter, French did not respond.

In aggravation, French had a record of prior discipline. Also, his misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. The order took effect September 13, 2013

Dana A. Godfrey, State Bar #152913, Diamond Bar (August 14, 2013). Godfrey, 62, was suspended for 30 days and placed on two years of probation for failing to competently perform legal services, failing to keep a client informed of developments, failing to render appropriate accounts, failing to promptly refund unearned fees, and failing to cooperate with a disciplinary investigation.

In May 2009 a client hired Godfrey to pursue a marital dissolution on her behalf. The client paid Godfrey $5,000 in advance fees. Godfrey filed a dissolution petition and commenced the action. Shortly thereafter, he began working for the Tustin firm of Hughes & Sullivan.

The client was unaware of Godfrey’s new employment and was unable to contact him for six months. Godfrey failed to appear at an initial status conference on the dissolution proceeding, as well as a later mandatory settlement conference. Godfrey finally contacted his client in November 2009, advising her of his new position and contact information. A month later he filed a substitution of attorney, replacing himself with his new firm as her attorney of record. The firm later billed the client, but the bill did not reflect the $5,000 advance fee.

The client requested that Godfrey provide an itemized billing to account for the advance fee, but he failed to do so. When the client learned that Godfrey had failed to appear at dissolution proceedings, she informed Hughes & Sullivan that she would no longer be honoring their billing statements. The client secured replacement counsel, substituted a new attorney to represent her, and filed a complaint with the State Bar. When investigators attempted to contract Godfrey, he did not respond.

There was also one other matter involving conduct warranting discipline.

In aggravation, Godfrey committed multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, he had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the State Bar in 1991. The order took effect September 13, 2013

John R. Habashy, State Bar #236708, Los Angeles (August 7, 2013). Habashy, 34, was suspended for 30 days and placed on two years of probation for charging and receiving advance fees in a loan-modification matter, failing to competently perform legal services, failing to promptly deliver client funds, failing to render appropriate accounts, failing to return unearned fees, and seeking an agreement to withdraw a State Bar complaint.

In 2005 Habashy opened Legal Debt Solutions, a loan-modification business for distressed homeowners. In October 2009 the Legislature enacted Civil Code § 2944.7, which among other provisions prohibits persons performing loan modifications from collecting advance fees. As a result, Habashy’s business began to decline.?After calling the State Bar’s ethics hotline and consulting with experts, Habashy felt he could avoid violating provisions of the statute by unbundling his services. He modified his retainer agreement to provide certain preliminary tasks for an advance fee, with the actual loan-modification discussions with the lender paid for only after completion of the services.

In September 2010 a client hired Habashy in a loan-modification matter, paying him $1,500 in advance fees. However, the State Bar determined that various services Habashy provided were covered by Civil Code § 2944.7(a). Although Habashy successfully helped the client postpone a foreclosure on his home, Habashy later admitted to receiving advance fees in violation of the statute.

There were also two other matters involving conduct that warranted discipline.

In aggravation, Habashy was found culpable of four counts of misconduct in three client matters that harmed his clients. In mitigation, Habashy had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the State Bar in 2005. He also cooperated by entering into a partial stipulation. The order took effect September 9, 2013

Donald A. Hilland, State Bar #240436, San Fernando (July 31, 2013). Hilland, 56, was suspended for 60 days and placed on two yeas of probation for charging and accepting advance fees in a loan modification, in violation of Civil Code § 2944.7(a), and committing an act involving moral turpitude.

In September 2009 Hilland agreed to negotiate a loan modification for a client on a pro bono basis. However, Hilland was unable to successfully negotiate a modification of the mortgage. A month later Hilland entered into a written fee agreement to represent the client, and he accepted $1,000 in advance fees. At the time Hilland collected the fees, he had not completed all the services he had been hired to perform. Hilland also failed to provide the client with a required written statement informing the client that it was unnecessary to have a third party negotiate a loan modification.

In March 2012 the State Bar opened an investigation into the matter. When the State Bar sent Hilland a letter requesting information, he provided documents that had been altered. By doing so, he attempted to mislead the State Bar.

In aggravation, Hilland engaged in multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, he cooperated with the State Bar by entering into a stipulation. The order took effect August 30, 2013

Jiyoung Kym, State Bar #125974, Los Angeles (August 14, 2013). Kym, 62, was suspended for 90 days and placed on two years of probation for failing to competently perform legal services, failing to inform a client of significant developments, failing to pay sanctions, violating a court order, filing an adversary complaint for a client without just cause, and failing to report sanctions to the State Bar.

In May 2008 Kym filed a breach of contract complaint on behalf of his client and Atex Corporation, seeking to collect a debt. Kym failed to attend a case-management conference, which prompted the defendant to file a motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute. The trial court eventually granted the motion. Kym took no further action, and he did not inform his client of the dismissal.

In a second matter, in February 2010 Kym was retained by the same client to represent him and his company in defense of a lawsuit filed by a former employee. Kym filed an answer and a cross-complaint for breach of contract and fraud. Kym then failed to respond to the plaintiff’s discovery requests, failed to appear at a scheduled case-management conference, and failed to attend hearings on various motions. As a result, the court ordered Kym and his clients to pay $7,040 in sanctions. Moreover, Kym’s inaction resulted in the dismissal of his client’s cross-complaint, which Kym did not seek to set aside. The court later entered judgment in the action against his client in the amount of $408,106. Kym neither attempted to set aside the judgment nor inform his client of the court’s rulings, the sanctions, the dismissal of the cross-complaint, or the judgment. To date, Kym has paid only $500 of the $7,040 in sanctions.

In aggravation, Kym engaged in multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused significant harm to his clients and to the public. In mitigation, Kym had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the State Bar in 1986. Also, he cooperated with the investigation and proceedings, and he expressed remorse for his misconduct. The order took effect September 13, 2013

Paul J. Majors, State Bar #153641, San Juan Capistrano (August 7, 2013). Majors, 65, was suspended for 14 months and placed on three years of probation for failing to competently perform legal services, failing to communicate with a client, failing to obey court orders, improperly withdrawing from representation, and failing to return unearned fees. He was also ordered to take the Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.

In May 2009 Majors was suspended for one year and placed on three years of probation for failing to comply with conditions to a previous order of discipline. The suspension followed his successful completion of the State Bar Court’s Alternative Discipline Program (ADP).

In aggravation, Majors had a record of prior discipline. Also, his misconduct harmed his client. In mitigation, Majors cooperated with the State Bar in its investigation, and he made restitution to two clients while participating in the ADP. The State Bar Court ordered that certain documents in the file be sealed. The order took effect September 9, 2013

Antonio Munoz, State Bar #169530, Ontario (August 7, 2013). Munoz, 57, was suspended for six months and placed on two years of probation for failing to competently perform legal services, commingling funds, failing to respond promptly to status inquiries, failing to refund unearned fees, committing acts involving moral turpitude, and failing to participate in a disciplinary investigation.

Between October 2011 and August 2012 Munoz paid personal expenses out of his client trust account, and he issued $9,254 in checks rejected for payment because of insufficient funds.

In January 2012 a client retained Munoz and paid him $4,200 in advance fees to assist with the incorporation of two businesses and debt collection. For the next seven months the client repeatedly attempted to contact Munoz, but Munoz failed to respond. In July 2012 Munoz disconnected his phone. He took no action on his client’s behalf but failed to return any of the advance fees.

In aggravation, Munoz engaged in ten counts of wrongdoing and repeatedly commingled funds. In mitigation, he had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the State Bar in 1993. Also, he entered into a stipulation. The order took effect September 6, 2013

Cornell J. Price, State Bar #62443, Pasadena (August 7, 2013). Price, 70, was suspended for 30 days and placed on two years of probation for failing to render appropriate accounts, failing to promptly refund unearned fees, and failing to cooperate with a disciplinary proceeding.

In October 2011 a client hired Price to represent her in a federal criminal matter. The client paid Price $15,000 in advance fees, and the client attempted to substitute in Price as her attorney. However, the court denied the request for substitution of attorney. The client then terminated Price’s representation and requested a refund of fees. Price refunded only $10,000. The client repeatedly requested return of the remaining $5,000, but Price failed to do so and failed to provide an accounting. The State Bar contacted Price following allegations of misconduct, but despite being granted an extension to reply he failed to respond. The client began fee-arbitration proceedings against Price, but he failed to appear at the proceedings. In February 2013 an arbitrator awarded the client $5,000, and Price refunded that amount.

In aggravation, Price committed multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed his client. He also failed to show remorse for his actions and failed to return unearned fees until required to do so. In mitigation, Price had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the State Bar in 1974. Also, he entered into a stipulation. The order took effect September 6, 2013

Margaret A. Seltzer, State Bar #87707, San Francisco (July 31, 2013). Seltzer, 67, was suspended for six months and placed on two years of probation for failing to competently perform legal services and failing to return unearned fees.

In November 2009 Seltzer was hired by SEB Construction in a dispute over payment for renovating a school district administration building. SEB’s principals met with Seltzer to discuss their options for obtaining payment, including drafting a demand letter and filing a claim. The principals signed a fee and retention agreement, agreeing to pay Seltzer $300 per hour plus an advance fee of $6,000.

After entering into the agreement, the clients repeatedly tried to contact Seltzer regarding the case, but she did not respond. Eventually, Seltzer told the clients she had been out of town on an emergency but had reviewed all the documents. Nonetheless, she failed to respond to inquiries, and the clients sought help from another attorney.

In January 2010 the new attorney terminated Seltzer and requested a refund of the advance fees. Seltzer disputed the scope of her services, but confirmed she would stop working on the matter. Although Seltzer claimed to have performed a preliminary analysis, evaluated the merits of the dispute, and drafted a demand letter, she never documented her work to the clients. She charged the clients $3,300 through December 2009, and she billed an additional $1,200 for other services. The clients filed a complaint with the State Bar, which issued a notice of disciplinary charges.

In aggravation, Seltzer had a record of prior discipline. Also, she was found culpable of uncharged misconduct for failing to maintain a disputed fee in a client trust account. Seltzer also demonstrated a lack of insight, maintaining throughout the proceedings that she had done nothing wrong. The order took effect August 30, 2013

Tara Selver, State Bar #153373, Torrance (August 7, 2013). Selver, 58, was suspended for 60 days and placed on two years of probation for failing to comply with conditions to a previous order of discipline.

In January 2010 Selver received a private reproval for failing to competently perform legal services and failing to communicate. Among other conditions, she was required to submit a written final report no later than January 2012 and to pay $7,500 with interest in restitution to one client. Selver failed to submit the final written report and failed to make any restitution.

In aggravation, Selver had a record of prior discipline. Also, her misconduct caused substantial harm to a client. The order took effect September 6, 2013

Raul T. Sosa, State Bar #58353, Altamonte Springs (August 7, 2013). Sosa, 65, was suspended for one year and placed on three years of probation for failing to communicate, failing to promptly notify a client of receipt of funds, failing to disburse funds, failing to maintain client funds in trust, misappropriating funds, and committing an act of moral turpitude, dishonesty, or corruption.

In 1994 Sosa associated into a client’s case against Dow Corning Trust. In 2006 he sent a claim to Dow on the client’s behalf, and Dow acknowledged that Sosa was the attorney of record. In 2011 Dow offered to settle the claim for $3,000, stating in a letter that “If you cash the $3,000 check, then you are agreeing to fully settle your claim.” Sosa deposited the check without informing his client about the offer. The client repeatedly attempted to contact Sosa, but he did not respond. In May 2012 Sosa sent the client a check for $2,200.

In aggravation, Sosa had a record of prior discipline. The order took effect September 6, 2013

PROBATION

Bridget L. Tracy, State Bar #171772, Huntington Beach (August 7, 2013). Tracy, 60, was placed on two years of probation for knowingly making a false report to the police, an act involving moral turpitude, dishonesty, or corruption.

In September 2011 Tracy called 911 and falsely reported to police that a woman acquaintance was threatening to stab a male friend of hers at his home. When police responded, they discovered Tracy had made a false report, and that she harbored ill feelings toward the woman because she considered her a romantic rival. Later, Tracy told the police and the State Bar that she made the false report because she was angry. Tracy also admitted that making the call was in bad judgment, and that she did so after consuming an excessive amount of alcohol.

In aggravation, Tracy harmed the administration of justice by making a false police report that required a criminal investigation. In mitigation, Tracy had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the State Bar in 1994. She admitted her misconduct and expressed remorse for her wrongdoing. Also, in April 2012 she voluntarily entered into the Lawyer Assistance Program to address her alcoholism. The order took effect September 6, 2013

There are no recent disciplinary actions of this type.