MAGAZINE
California Lawyer

DISBARMENT

Patrick J. Grannan, State Bar #115693, Whittier (July 22, 2014). Grannan, 55, 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 comply with conditions to a previous order of discipline. The order took effect August 21, 2014
Benjamin E Herron, State Bar #249172, Odessa, TX (July 31, 2014). Herron, 41, was disbarred for failing to comply with conditions to a previous order of discipline.

In aggravation, Herron had a record of two prior disciplines. Also, he engaged in multiple acts of wrongdoing. His unwillingness or inability to comply with the terms of his probation demonstrated his indifference toward rehabilitation. In mitigation, Herron cooperated with the State Bar by entering into a stipulation. The order took effect August 30, 2014

Garry L Jones, State Bar #66344, Santa Ana (July 31, 2014). Jones, 73, was disbarred for aiding his nonattorney staff in the unauthorized practice of law, engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, failing to obtain informed written consent from his clients as to a potential conflict, failing to promptly refund unearned legal fees, failing to provide his clients with appropriate accounts, failing to deposit advance filing fees into a client trust account, failing to promptly pay funds in his possession that his clients were entitled to receive, sharing legal fees with a nonlawyer, collecting legal fees while he was suspended from practicing law, failing to competently perform legal services, failing to take reasonable steps to avoid foreseeable prejudice to his clients, failing to keep his clients informed of significant developments in their cases, failing to promptly respond to his clients’ status inquiries, and failing to comply with conditions to a previous order of discipline. Jones committed numerous acts of misconduct in five separate matters.

In aggravation, Jones had a record of three prior disciplines. Also, he committed multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed his clients, and he failed to make restitution. In mitigation, Jones cooperated with the State Bar by entering into a stipulation. The order took effect August 30, 2014

Thomas E Kent, State Bar #107238, Los Angeles (July 31, 2014). Kent, 57, was disbarred for failing to obey a court order and misappropriating funds, acts involving moral turpitude.

In June 2012 Kent was counsel of record for two debtors. That month the U.S. Bankruptcy Court of the Central District of California ordered him to deposit $270,358 into a client trust account (CTA). The amount represented the proceeds of a personal injury settlement involving his clients. The court ordered Kent to leave the funds in the CTA until ordered to disburse them. Shortly after depositing the funds into his CTA, Kent began making withdrawals from the account for his own purposes. By March 2013 the CTA balance had fallen below $59. Later, the bankruptcy court ordered Kent to release $125,000 to resolve a competing claim. Kent issued a check for that amount, but it was written against insufficient funds. The bankruptcy court subsequently ordered Kent to release the balance of the settlement money to the debtors, but he did not do so.

Ultimately, the bankruptcy court permanently suspended Kent from practicing law in the bankruptcy courts for committing professional misconduct, including misappropriating more than $270,000 of his clients’ funds. The court also imposed additional sanctions.

After the bankruptcy court’s decision became final, the State Bar commenced its disciplinary proceeding. In light of the seriousness of Kent’s misconduct, aggravating factors, and a lack of any significant mitigating factors, the State Bar Court recommended his disbarment. In aggravation, Kent had a record of prior discipline. The order took effect August 30, 2014

Kenneth R Markman, State Bar #155529, Los Angeles (July 22, 2014). Markman, 50, was disbarred following his conviction of conspiracy to commit a crime, bringing drugs into a jail, and possession of controlled substances in a jail, felonies involving acts of moral turpitude.

In October 2011 Markman arrived at the Foltz Criminal Justice Center of the Los Angeles County Superior Court and asked to speak with his client, who was incarcerated there pending a court date. Prior to this meeting, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Dept. had received information that the client was receiving narcotics regularly during visits with Markman. When Markman walked into an attorney-client meeting room, he was met by a sheriff’s investigator, deputies, and a narcotics-detecting dog. The dog “alerted” on a package Markman removed from his suit jacket pocket. Although Markman initially said he thought it contained cigarettes, he later stated that it might contain cocaine or methamphetamine. The dog also alerted to his right front pants pocket and briefcase. When the investigator asked Markman how much he was paid to transport the narcotics into the jail, he eventually replied that his client’s girlfriend had paid him money to deliver the drugs. Upon inspection, the package was revealed to contain 26 small balloons with methamphetamine and tar heroin, a chunk of marijuana, and hypodermic syringes.

One month later, a sheriff’s officer at the Antelope Valley Superior Court saw Markman walk into the courthouse lobby and place his belongings in a plastic tray at the security-screening area. Looking at an x-ray screen, the officer saw two glass pipes in Markman’s wallet such as are used to ingest narcotics. Realizing that the officer saw the pipes, Markman began to walk toward the exit, but the officer detained him. In a search, two bundles of rock cocaine and two glass pipes were discovered in the wallet. Markman then acknowledged that he had had an addiction for many years.

In January 2012 Markman was charged with five felony violations in relation to the conduct the prior October: Penal Code §§ 182(a)(1) [conspiracy to commit a crime]; 4573 [bringing drugs into a jail]; 4573.6 [possession of a controlled substance (heroin) in a jail]; 4573.6 [possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine) in a jail]; and 4573.6 [possession of a controlled substance (marijuana) in a jail]. He was further charged with two felony violations for his November conduct: Penal Code §§ 4573 [bringing drugs into a jail] and 4573.6 [possession of a controlled substance (cocaine) in a jail].

In February 2013 Markman pleaded no contest to the charges. He was later placed on three years of probation, required to serve 365 days in jail, and pay restitution.

In aggravation, Markman engaged in multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, Markman had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the State Bar in 1991. Also, he cooperated by entering into a stipulation. The order took effect August 21, 2014

Andrew P Mullaly, State Bar #185716, El Cajon (July 31, 2014). Mullaly, 45, 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, misrepresenting to a client that he had filed a probate petition, and practicing law while he was not an active member of the State Bar.

In its petition for disbarment, the State Bar noted it had no contact with Mullaly since his default was entered, and that Mullaly had two prior records of discipline. Mullaly also failed to respond to the petition for disbarment. The order took effect August 30, 2014

Antonio Munoz, State Bar #169530, Rancho Cucamonga (July 31, 2014). Munoz, 58, was disbarred for failing to competently perform legal services, failing to keep his client reasonably informed of significant developments, failing to promptly respond to status inquiries, failing to communicate a written settlement offer, failing to promptly disburse funds his client was entitled to receive, failing to report judicial sanctions to the State Bar, failing to pay court-ordered sanctions, commingling funds, making withdrawals on a client trust account against insufficient funds, misappropriating funds, failing to provide appropriate accounts, failing to take reasonable steps to avoid foreseeable prejudice to his clients, failing to promptly release client files upon termination of employment, failing to promptly refund unearned fees, and failing to cooperate and participate in a disciplinary investigation. Munoz committed 35 acts of misconduct in a number of matters during a period of approximately two years.

In aggravation, Munoz had a record of prior discipline. Also, he committed multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed his clients, and he failed to make restitution. In mitigation, Munoz was experiencing family problems during the period of his misconduct. The order took effect August 30, 2014

Peter J Rimel, State Bar #178345, Tustin (July 31, 2014). Rimel, 52, was disbarred for failing to maintain client funds in trust, misappropriating funds, and failing to render appropriate accounts.

In aggravation, Rimel committed multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed his clients. In addition, Rimel demonstrated indifference toward his misconduct, initially characterizing the misappropriation of client funds as a loan. Moreover, he failed to make restitution to his clients. In mitigation, Rimel had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the State Bar in 1995, and he cooperated by entering into a stipulation. The order took effect August 30, 2014

Vincent V Shulman, State Bar #207105, Los Angeles (July 22, 2014). Shulman, 44, was disbarred after his conviction on multiple felony counts of grand theft, acts involving moral turpitude.

In April 2013 the superior court found Shulman guilty after his plea of nolo contendere to multiple felony counts of violating Penal Code § 487(a) (grand theft). The conviction is now final, and the State Bar has determined that it meets the criteria for summary disbarment. The order took effect August 21, 2014

Linda Z Voss, State Bar #111434, San Mateo (July 31, 2014). Voss, 62, was disbarred for misconduct committed in the U. S. Bankruptcy Courts in California.

Between January 2012 and April 2013, Voss filed 83 cases in the bankruptcy courts of the Northern and Central Districts that were frivolous and filed for an improper purpose. The cases were filed on behalf of her clients for no reason other than to hinder and delay foreclosing creditors. The cases included only skeletal petitions, with no creditors listed other than the foreclosing creditors. Voss failed to file required bankruptcy documents and also failed to appear for hearings. The majority of the cases were dismissed based on defects, or on Voss’s failure to appear. Many of the petitions were false due to Voss’s failure to disclose that they were repeat filings. In 54 of the cases, Voss failed to disclose her compensation, as required.

In May 2013 Voss was suspended from practicing in the Northern District bankruptcy court for 30 months. In July 2013 Voss was suspended from practicing in the Central District bankruptcy court for 30 months.

In aggravation, Voss engaged in multiple acts of wrongdoing in a pattern of misconduct that caused significant harm to the administration of justice. In addition, she showed indifference towards rectification of or atonement for her misconduct. In mitigation, Voss had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the State Bar in 1983, and she cooperated by entering into a stipulation. The order took effect August 30, 2014

Actions From Previous Issues

Heroico M. Aguiluz, State Bar #79580, Los Angeles (June 11, 2014). Heroico M. Aguiluz, State Bar # 79580, Los Angeles (June 11). Aguiluz, 77, was disbarred for repeatedly failing to comply with court orders. In October 2003 the trial court sanctioned Aguiluz and his client $2,000, to be paid within 30 days. In January 2004 the court sanctioned Aguiluz an additional $2,000, again payable within 30 days. In 2005 the court of appeal affirmed the sanctions orders. At all times, Aguiluz received the notice of the sanctions orders but did not pay the sanctions.

In December 2006 the trial court sanctioned Aguiluz and his client $500. On that same date, in the same matter, the court issued another sanctions order for $500. In July 2007 the trial court sanctioned Aguiluz $8,500, payable to the opposing law firm. In January 2008 the court again sanctioned Aguiluz and his client $2,382 for discovery abuse. The following month the court ordered Aguiluz and his client to pay the $1,000 in sanctions imposed in December 2006, with interest. In addition, the court ordered Aguiluz and his client to pay $2,382 for misuse of the discovery process.

In March 2008 the court ordered Aguiluz and his client to pay $3,207 because of their continued failure to pay the 2006 sanctions. In July the court ordered Aguiluz and his client to pay $9,720 in total sanctions for their discovery abuses. At all times, Aguiluz received notice of the sanctions orders but paid none of them.

In November 2009 Aguiluz filed for bankruptcy protection. However, the bankruptcy court found that the judicial sanctions ordered against him were the result of litigation misconduct, and it declined to discharge those sanctions. In sum, Aguiluz failed to pay $31,190 in court-ordered sanctions. Although the first two sanction orders were barred by the statute of limitations, the remaining sanctions, totaling more than $27,000, were within the five-year limitations period.

In aggravation, Aguiluz had a record of prior discipline. He committed multiple acts of wrongdoing, demonstrating a pattern of misconduct. His repeated failure to comply with discovery orders caused significant harm to the administration of justice. Also, he showed complete indifference toward rectification of or atonement for his misconduct. The order took effect July 11, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.

Haig P. Ashikian, State Bar #183083, Encino (June 9, 2014). Ashikian, 48, was disbarred for failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so. He was charged with seven counts of misconduct, including misappropriating client funds, failing to render appropriate accounts, and failing to deposit a settlement draft into a blocked account for a minor client.

In its petition for disbarment, the State Bar noted that there were four investigations pending against Ashikian, and that he had a record of prior discipline. The order took effect July 9, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.

Michael W. Coopet, State Bar #111063, San Dimas (June 26, 2014). Coopet, 57, was disbarred in connection with misconduct he committed in Minnesota.

Coopet was admitted to practice law in both California and Minnesota. In 1992 the Minnesota Department of Commerce issued an insurance agent’s license to Coopet, authorizing him to sell insurance. Although his insurance license was suspended in November 1998 for failure to pay renewal fees, Coopet engaged in insurance-related activities in 1999 with an altered insurance license. In 2000 the purchaser of an annuity complained to Coopet’s employer that he had not explained the true nature of the insurance product. The complaint prompted an investigation of the transaction by the Commerce Department, which discovered that Coopet did not possess a valid license. Coopet submitted three checks he purportedly wrote as payment for the 1998 license-renewal fee, but two of those checks actually represented payment for notary commissions. Also, none of the checks or the amounts supported Coopet’s claim that the checks evidenced payment of his 1998 renewal fee. Furthermore, Coopet covered up the memo portion of the checks to conceal the annotations on the checks.

In April 2001 Coopet entered into a consent order for the revocation of his insurance agent license, based on the allegation that he sold an annuity policy without first obtaining a valid license in violation of Minnesota law.

In September 2001 the director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility in Minnesota initiated an investigation into the matter, requesting Coopet’s response. Coopet denied any wrongdoing and alleged that the Commerce Department’s action was a personal vendetta against him. He made other statements that he knew to be false, including assertions about the checks he submitted to the Commerce Department. The director then obtained copies of the altered checks Coopet had submitted.

In March 2006 Coopet entered into a stipulation with the director, unconditionally admitting the allegations against him. The director and Coopet jointly recommended a 36-month suspension. In July 2006 the Minnesota Supreme Court ordered Coopet’s indefinite suspension by the Minnesota Bar, considering his misconduct a violation of professional rules prohibiting actions involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, and knowingly making a false statement of material fact in connection with a disciplinary matter.

Based on findings in the Minnesota proceeding, the California State Bar Court determined discipline was warranted. It found Coopet culpable of committing acts involving moral turpitude by misrepresenting the true nature of an annuity, altering documents, and making misrepresentations to the Commerce Department and to the director of Minnesota’s Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility. The State Bar Court also found Coopet culpable of failing to cooperate with a disciplinary matter and culpable of misconduct in five client matters related to legal work in Minnesota, which were also violations of California law.

In aggravation, Coopet had a record of prior discipline. Also, he engaged in multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, Coopet cooperated with the State Bar by entering into a stipulation. Also, during the period of his misconduct Coopet was experiencing extreme emotional difficulties. The order took effect July 27, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.

M. I. Daniel, State Bar #163403, South Pasadena (June 26, 2014). Daniel, 58, was disbarred for failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so.

In April 2013 the State Bar properly served a notice of disciplinary charges (NDC) on Daniel, charging her with four counts of misconduct, including failing to competently perform legal services, failing to communicate, failing to return unearned fees, and failing to render proper accounting. Daniel failed to file a response to the NDC. In its petition for disbarment, the State Bar noted that Daniel had other investigations or disciplinary charges pending against her. The order took effect July 27, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.

Jeffrey R. Dreiling, State Bar #221285, North Highlands (June 26, 2014). Dreiling, 41, was disbarred for failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so.

In April 2013 the State Bar Court properly served Dreiling with two notices of hearing following his conviction in two separate criminal matters in Nevada for felony possession of a controlled substance and driving under the influence. Dreiling failed to respond, his default was entered, and the factual allegations were deemed admitted. In its petition for disbarment, the State Bar noted that Dreiling had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the State Bar in 2002. His two underlying convictions stemmed from his arrest for driving under the influence in March 2009, and possession of methamphetamine in March 2010. The order took effect July 26, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.

Daniel B. Halpern, State Bar #189336, San Jose (June 26, 2014). Daniel Burt Halpern, State Bar # 189336, San Jose (June 26). Halpern, 43, was summarily disbarred based on his felony conviction for grand theft.

In June 2013 Halpern pleaded guilty to two felony counts of grand theft (Pen. Code §§ 484 & 487, subd. (a)). He also admitted that the two felonies involved fraud or embezzlement, were part of a pattern of related felony conduct, and the pattern of conduct resulted in the loss of more than $500,000. The judgment is now final and the State Bar Court has determined that the conviction met the criteria for summary disbarment. The order took effect July 26, 2014

This action originally appeared in our January 2015 issue.

William A. Hirst, State Bar #36401, Pleasanton (May 13, 2014). Hirst, 74, was summarily disbarred following his conviction for submitting a false statement to the IRS.

In December 2012 Hirst pleaded guilty to submitting a false statement to the IRS. The chief trial counsel then requested that Hirst be summarily disbarred because his offense was a felony that included an element of specific intent to make a false statement, which involved moral turpitude. Hirst filed a notice of nonopposition to the request for summary disbarment. The order took effect June 12, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.

Rosemarie T. Hollander, State Bar #114175, Fountain Valley (June 26, 2014). Hollander, 69, was disbarred for engaging in the unauthorized practice of law in another jurisdiction, collecting an advance fee for loan-modification services in violation of Civil Code section 2944.7(a)(1), failing to cooperate with a State Bar investigation, and failing to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.

In August 2010 Hollander was hired by a client to perform legal services relating to a home mortgage loan modification in Connecticut. Although Hollander led the client to believe she was licensed to practice law in Connecticut, she was not. The client paid Hollander $3,495 in fees, but the loan-modification package she submitted on his behalf was denied.

In April 2011 another attorney hired by the client demanded that Hollander refund the entire fee. Later that month Hollander sent a partial refund of $1,747.50. In June 2013 the State Bar opened an investigation after Hollander’s client filed a complaint alleging misconduct. Although Hollander received two letters from the State Bar investigator she failed to respond.

In a second matter, in June 2013 Hollander was ordered by the California Supreme Court to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court, but she failed to do so.

In aggravation, Hollander had a record of prior discipline. She committed multiple acts of wrongdoing that significantly harmed her client, and she failed to make full restitution to the client. In mitigation, Hollander cooperated with the State Bar by entering into a stipulation. The order took effect July 26, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.

Kay Del Carmen Holley, State Bar #87549, San Francisco (June 9, 2014). Holley, 72, was disbarred for failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so.

In March 2013 the State Bar filed and properly served Holley with a notice of disciplinary proceedings (NDC), charging her with failing to comply with conditions to a previous order of discipline. Holley failed to respond, and the State Bar moved for entry of her default. In its petition for disbarment the State Bar noted that Holley had a record of prior discipline. The order took effect July 9, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.

Rita A. Kahlenberg, State Bar #200518, Valley Village (June 26, 2014). Kahlenberg, 67, was disbarred for failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so.

In March 2013 the State Bar filed and properly served an amended notice of disciplinary charges against Kahlenberg that included eight counts of misconduct in one client matter for failing to communicate, failing to competently perform legal services, failing to return unearned fees, improperly withdrawing from representation, holding herself out as practicing or entitled to practice law while suspended, collecting an illegal fee, committing an act involving moral turpitude, and failing to cooperate in a State Bar investigation. In addition, she was charged with failing to comply with the terms of a prior discipline. In its petition for disbarment, the State Bar noted that Kahlenberg had a record of two prior disciplines and had not yet paid $2,500 plus interest in restitution. The order took effect July 26, 2014

This action originally appeared in our January 2015 issue.

Elizabeth M. Karnazes, State Bar #118922, Foster City (May 14, 2014). Elizabeth M. Barnson KARNAZES, State Bar # 118922, Foster City (May 14). Karnazes, 59, was disbarred for failing to maintain client funds in trust, misappropriating funds, commingling, failing to render appropriate accounts, improperly withdrawing from representation, and seeking an agreement from a client to not cooperate with a State Bar investigation.

In January 2005 Karnazes signed a fee agreement to provide legal services to her son, who had turned 18 one day earlier and was disabled. The fee agreement provided for a 50 percent contingency fee on any remaining recovery. Karnazes then represented her son in at least three lawsuits: the MHYR lawsuit, the Odyssey lawsuit, and the Moore lawsuit.

In 2009 Karnazes settled the MHYR and Odyssey matters for $40,000 and $60,000, respectively. She deposited those funds in a client trust account (CTA) and issued $7,500 in total advances to her son. As of June 2009 her son was entitled to $33,740 after deducting costs and attorneys fees. Despite the son’s repeated requests for the remainder of the funds, Karnazes refused to distribute them, accusing him of hating and abandoning her.

In 2009 Karnazes commingled about $100,000 of her personal funds into her CTA. She eventually withdrew the funds for her own use.

In June 2010 Karnazes’s son filed a complaint with the State Bar, but Karnazes continued to refuse to distribute the funds. In October 2010 she petitioned the superior court to appoint her as conservator of her son’s estate, which the court denied. Also in 2010 Karnazes obtained a default judgment in the Moore lawsuit for $56,995.

In March 2011 Karnazes received the funds and deposited the check into her CTA by forging her son’s signature. Karnazes claimed her son’s share was $23,757, after deducting $9,482 in alleged costs and $23,757 in attorneys fees. In total, Karnazes owed her son $57,496. In May 2011 Karnazes had a $63,000 cashier’s check drawn against her CTA made payable to her son, and she offered the sum to him if he agreed to release his right to any disputed funds from the settlement and to abide by a nondisparagement clause. At the time she made this offer, Karnazes knew her son had filed a complaint with the State Bar. Her son refused the offer.

In June 2012, four days before her disciplinary trial, Karnazes ultimately paid her son $53,508 as his share of the settlement proceeds and provided him with an accounting. However, the accounting omitted multiple withdrawals from her CTA and overstated her attorneys fees. Moreover, even assuming that the costs she claimed were accurate, her son was entitled to $3,988 more than what she gave him.

The State Bar charged Karnazes with 17 counts of misconduct. The hearing judge found her culpable of 9 counts, including misappropriation and trust account violations for her refusal to distribute settlement funds for more than three years. The hearing judge recommended her disbarment. Karnazes appealed the hearing judge’s findings, arguing that she should have been exonerated of all the charges. Although the State Bar Court found fewer violations than the hearing judge, it adopted the hearing judge’s recommendation.

In aggravation, Karnazes had a record of prior discipline. In addition, while committing much of the current misconduct, she was on disciplinary probation. Also, Karnazes committed multiple acts of wrongdoing that significantly harmed her client. Her misconduct was widespread, and she demonstrated a lack of remorse. In mitigation, Karnazes was entitled to moderate mitigating weight for her good character. The order took effect June 13, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.

Milton Kerlan, Jr., State Bar #39719, Fresno (May 13, 2014). Kerlan, 73, 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 comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. In its petition for disbarment, the State Bar noted that Kerlan had a record of five prior disciplinary matters. The order took effect June 12, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.
Estrelita Lane, State Bar #215086, Los Angeles (June 5, 2014). Lane, 49, 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 return unearned fees, and failing to render appropriate accounts. The State Bar Court recommended her disbarment and ordered payment of $2,000 in restitution with interest. The order took effect July 5, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.
Clarence Livingston, Jr., State Bar #85773, Oakland (June 26, 2014). Livingston, 65, was disbarred for failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so. He was charged with seven counts of misconduct based on two client matters. In the first matter, Livingston was charged with holding himself out as entitled to practice law when he was not an active bar member, failing to promptly communicate to his clients that he had been suspended from the practice of law, and failing to promptly return a client’s file upon termination of employment. In the second matter, Livingston was charged with failing to competently perform legal services, failing to promptly return a client’s file upon termination of employment, and failing to cooperate in a State Bar investigation. In its petition for disbarment, the State Bar reported that Livingston had a record of prior discipline. The order took effect July 26, 2014

This action originally appeared in our January 2015 issue.
Patrick M. Passenheim, State Bar #140752, San Diego (June 9, 2014). Passenheim, 67, was disbarred for failing to comply with conditions to a previous order of discipline and failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so. In its petition for disbarment, the State Bar noted that Passenheim had a record of three prior disciplinary matters. The order took effect July 9, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.
Daniel L. Pearson, State Bar #157206, Glendora (June 26, 2014). Pearson, 49, 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 maintain client funds in trust, misappropriating funds, and failing to participate in a State Bar investigation. The order took effect July 26, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.
Alexander J. Pecel, State Bar #167229, Valencia (June 5, 2014). Pecel, 46, was disbarred for failing to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. In its petition for disbarment, the State Bar noted that Pecel had a record of four prior disciplinary matters. The order took effect July 5, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.
David B. Prince, State Bar #166113, Los Gatos (June 26, 2014). Prince, 52, was summarily disbarred following his conviction on five felony counts of wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343.

In October 2011 Prince was convicted of five felony counts of wire fraud, crimes involving moral turpitude. The conviction is now final and the State Bar has determined that it met the criteria for summary disbarment. The order took effect July 26, 2014

This action originally appeared in our January 2015 issue.

Neal R. Safran, State Bar #72491, Westlake Village (May 13, 2014). Safran, 64, was disbarred for failing to maintain client funds in trust, misappropriating funds, and committing an act involving moral turpitude, dishonesty, or corruption.

In January 2009 Safran was hired by a client to represent him on a contingency basis involving a personal injury claim stemming from an automobile accident. In August 2010 Safran settled the client’s personal injury claim for $39,775. Safran deposited the funds he received into a client trust account.

In April 2011 Safran disbursed $13,292 to the client, and the next month he disbursed $325 to pay for the client’s paramedic services. Safran made no other disbursements of settlement funds until February 2013, after the State Bar intervened in the matter. Ultimately, Safran paid all of the outstanding medical liens and disbursed the rest of the client’s settlement.

In aggravation, Safran had a record of prior discipline. The order took effect June 12, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.

Danielle M. Scherrer, State Bar #271115, Oceanside (June 26, 2014). Scherrer, 36, was disbarred for failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so. She was charged with misappropriating funds and failing to cooperate with a State Bar investigation. The order took effect July 26, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.
James J. Seltzer, State Bar #54533, Muntinlupa City, (June 26, 2014). Seltzer, 66, was disbarred for failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so. He was charged with six counts of misconduct in one client matter, including failing to maintain client funds in trust, misappropriating funds, failing to promptly pay client funds, and failing to participate in a State Bar investigation. The order took effect July 26, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.
Victoria M. Walter, State Bar #187805, Glen Ellen (June 26, 2014). Walter, 49, was disbarred for failing to participate in a disciplinary proceeding after receiving adequate notice and opportunity to do so. In its petition for disbarment, the State Bar noted that Walter had a record of two prior disciplinary matters. The order took effect July 26, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.
Robert D. Wyatt, State Bar #73240, Walnut Creek (June 5, 2014). Wyatt, 74, was disbarred following his conviction for vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, which included factual findings involving moral turpitude.

In December 2010 Wyatt drank vodka at his home and drove to a restaurant, where he had dinner and drank one beer. While driving home he hit an 85-year-old resident of the gated senior community where Wyatt lived. The victim was thrown between 38 and 52 feet and suffered a severe head wound. Because Wyatt did not have a cell phone, he drove to the guard station, leaving the victim alone, and reported the incident to the security guard. When the police arrived Wyatt explained that the victim had “streaked” in front of his car and that Wyatt could not avoid the collision. Wyatt told the officer that he had one beer, but he failed the officer’s field sobriety tests. He never mentioned the vodka he drank. The officer then arrested Wyatt, and a blood test revealed his blood-alcohol content was .18 percent. The victim died 60 hours after the accident. Later, in an interview with the police, Wyatt stated that he did not feel he was impaired when the accident occurred. In April 2012 he pleaded nolo contendere to vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated.

A hearing judge determined that the conviction involved moral turpitude because of Wyatt’s disregard of the law, the resulting loss of life, his leaving the victim alone, and making misrepresentations to the police. The hearing judge also recommended disbarment. Wyatt appealed the hearing judge’s decision, seeking a reduction in discipline to a one-year suspension plus credit for time spent on interim suspension. However, the Review Department agreed that the conviction involved moral turpitude.

In aggravation, Wyatt’s misconduct greatly harmed the victim’s family and friends. Wyatt also lacked candor during the proceedings. In mitigation, Wyatt had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the State Bar in 1976. In addition, he demonstrated his good character and showed remorse for his misconduct. The order took effect July 5, 2014

This action originally appeared in our December 2014 issue.