News
Features
Aug. 1, 2006
Discipline Report
DISBARMENT
Eric L. Holt, State Bar # 176153, Valencia (March 23). Holt, 45, was disbarred for failure to comply with rule 955 of the Rules of Court.
In March 2005 Holt was suspended for six months and until he made restitution of $7,913 to one client and until the State Bar Court granted a motion terminating the suspension. He was disciplined for failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to communicate with clients, failure to cooperate with a State Bar investigation, and failure to comply with conditions to a December 2003 private reproval. Conditions to the 2005 discipline required Holt to comply with rule 955 of the Rules of Court by notifying clients and opposing counsel of his suspension within 30 days and filing an affidavit of compliance within 40 days. He failed to file the affidavit and failed to provide an explanation to the bar for his noncompliance.
In aggravation, Holt had a record of prior discipline, private reprovals in January 2002 and December 2003. In the current matter, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed clients. By failing to comply with the imposed conditions, Holt demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct. Also, he failed to participate with the bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect April 22.
SUSPENSION
Richard E. Ackerknecht, State Bar # 132175, Los Angeles (March 10). Ackerknecht, 45, was suspended for 30 days and placed on 24 months of probation following his conviction for violating Health and Safety Code section 11350(a) and Penal Code section 484(a).
In June 1999 Ackerknecht was arrested by department store security for shoplifting two shirts. At the time of his arrest, the police found he was holding five small containers of heroin. In August 1999 Ackerknecht pleaded no contest to violating Penal Code section 484(a), theft of property; and Health and Safety Code section 11350(a), possession of a controlled substance. He was ordered not to use or possess any narcotics or restricted or dangerous drugs and to pay fees and fines of $250. In February 2000 Ackerknecht was sentenced to 24 months of summary probation, and he was ordered to perform 100 hours of community service work and pay a restitution fee of $100. In February 2001 he pleaded guilty to the deferred felony count of Health and Safety Code section 11350(a). The deferred entry of judgment was terminated and the case was dismissed. In January 2002 the guilty plea to the possession of a controlled substance was dismissed and a not guilty plea was entered. The misdemeanor theft count involved an act of moral turpitude.
In October 2004 Ackerknecht was in a grocery store when store security observed him placing seven or eight items into his backpack. He paid for the groceries in the cart, but he did not pay for the items in his backpack. When approached by store security, Ackerknecht said he was financially unstable. The security officers found Ackerknecht carrying $4,000 in cash, four credit cards, and a checkbook. In March 2005 he pleaded nolo contendere to violating Penal Code section 484(a). He was placed on 36 months of summary probation and ordered to serve 15 days in county jail and pay a fine of $500 or perform 16 days of roadside work. The fees and fines totaled $1,645.
In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, Ackerknecht had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1987. He also cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect April 9.
Robert K. Andres, State Bar # 104018, Burlington, Vermont (March 23). Andres, 51, was suspended for three years and until he provides proof of his rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and ability in the law. After his misconduct in Vermont, he was disciplined in California for attorney misconduct for failure to perform legal services with competence and failure to obey the laws of the United States, Vermont, and California.
In 2000 Andres was appointed to represent a criminal defendant in a postconviction petition for relief of a Vermont superior court order. In October 2000 Andres filed an amended petition for the client. Andres conducted an investigation of the case by talking to the client?s prior attorney and listening to a tape of the client?s guilty plea. In June 2001 the Vermont superior court notified Andres of a pretrial conference scheduled for July 2001. Andres failed to appear for the conference. The conference judge was also the sentencing judge, and under Vermont law the sentencing judge cannot hear a petition for postconviction relief. Andres failed to have the client?s petition heard by another judge.
In July 2001 the state filed a motion for summary judgment for dismissal of the client?s petition. Andres made the decision not to file an opposition, believing that the client had no defense to the state?s motion. In September 2001 the court granted the motion and dismissed the client?s petition. The client, without using Andres, filed an appeal. Later, the parties agreed to vacate the court?s ruling and remanded the matter to a different judge.
In September 2002 the Vermont Professional Responsibility Board found that Andres violated the Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct by failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing his client. The finding was based on his failure to attend the pretrial conference and failure to respond to the state?s motion for summary judgment. Andres was disciplined for professional misconduct by the Vermont Supreme Court.
In a second matter, in August 2001 Andres and his girlfriend entered a bar. Also in the bar were his girlfriend?s ex-husband and the ex-husband?s girlfriend. After the ex-husband and his girlfriend left the bar, Andres verified with another person at the bar that the man in a wheelchair was the ex-husband. Andres confronted the ex-husband with his belief that the ex-husband had harassed Andres and his girlfriend.
While the ex-husband was getting into his van, Andres punched the ex-husband. In April 2002 Andres was convicted of simple assault and sentenced to three months in jail. The sentence was stayed, and Andres was placed on probation with conditions. The probation conditions included that Andres not enter establishments that serve alcohol and that he not purchase, possess, or drink alcoholic beverages. In July 2002 he violated his probation by entering a bar and consuming alcohol.
In August 2002 Andres?s probation was revoked, and he was ordered to serve the ordered jail time. Later, disciplinary charges were filed against him by the Vermont State Bar. In September 2002 he was placed on interim suspension by the Vermont Bar. In February 2003 the board found Andres culpable of the assault. Andres was suspended for three years in Vermont without being given credit for the period of his interim suspension.
In aggravation, Andres had a record of prior discipline in California. In 2000 he was placed on one year of probation. In the current matter, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing and failure to cooperate with State Bar proceedings before entry of his default.
The order took effect April 22.
Stephen L. Burton, State Bar # 113748, Sherman Oaks (April 18). Burton, 51, was suspended for 30 days and placed on two years of probation after being found culpable in four client matters of engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, engaging in misleading advertising, and failure to promptly return unearned fees.
In 2004 Burton ran an Internet advertisement for the Foreclosure Recovery Center, which claimed to help homeowners save their homes that were about to be sold in foreclosure. The four clients that hired Burton owned property in Illinois, Georgia, Florida, and Arizona. Burton was admitted to practice law only in California. The State Bar Court found that Burton?s advertisements contained false and deceptive information or tended to confuse, deceive, or mislead the public. He also failed to promptly return unearned fees by waiting until the State Bar was involved. In September 2005 Burton returned unearned fees to the four clients.
In aggravation, Burton had a record of prior discipline. In the current matter, the misconduct caused significant harm to clients and to the administration of justice. In mitigation, after the State Bar became involved, Burton discontinued the Foreclosure Recovery Center, and he removed his Internet advertisements.
The order took effect May 18.
Arnold Chin, State Bar # 95797, San Francisco (April 18). Chin, 58, was suspended for six months and placed on three years of probation for failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to communicate by failing to inform a client about the status of a case, improper withdrawal from representation, failure to promptly release client papers and property, failure to provide an itemized statement of disbursed funds, failure to maintain client funds in trust, and commingling funds.
In aggravation, Chin had a record of prior discipline. In the current discipline, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, at the time of his misconduct Chin suffered extreme family turmoil and the death of both parents.
The order took effect May 18.
Roger A. Gerdes, State Bar # 158701, Carpinteria (March 17). Gerdes, 55, was suspended for six months and until he makes restitution of $3,000 to one client and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. He was disciplined for entering into an improper business transaction with a client and failure to cooperate with a State Bar investigation.
In 2002 Gerdes was hired to represent a client in a family trust matter. In March 2003 he asked the client for a loan of $3,000. Gerdes provided the client with an unsecured promissory note, agreeing to repay $3,400 by April 2003. Gerdes failed to obtain the client?s informed written consent to the loan, failed to advise the client in writing of the client?s right to seek the advice of independent counsel, failed to give the client time to seek advice about the loan, and failed to repay the loan as promised.
In September 2004 a bar investigator wrote to Gerdes requesting a written response to allegations filed against him by the client. Gerdes failed to respond to the investigator?s letter.
In aggravation, Gerdes had a record of prior discipline. In the current matter, the misconduct harmed a client, and Gerdes demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct.
The order took effect April 16.
George A. Harris III, State Bar # 178771, Oakland (April 18). Harris, 43, was suspended for six months and until he makes restitution of $1,000 to one client and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. He was disciplined for failure to perform legal services with competence, improper withdrawal from representation, failure to maintain client funds in trust, commingling funds, misrepresenting facts to a client, engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, failure to cooperate with a State Bar investigation, and failure to report court-imposed sanctions to the bar.
In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. Also, Harris failed to cooperate with the bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect May 18.
Clinton A. Johnson, State Bar # 57407, Oakland (March 23). Johnson, 62, was suspended for 90 days for failure to maintain client funds in trust and misappropriation.
In mitigation, Johnson had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1973. No clients were harmed by the misconduct, and Johnson restored funds before bar involvement. Also, at the time of the misconduct, Johnson suffered severe financial stress. Between April and August 2003 the client in the current matter owed Johnson approximately $50,000 in fees. Between August and November 2003 the same client owed him $75,000 in fees. In an unrelated case, another client owed $70,000 to Johnson in legal fees.
The order took effect April 22.
John R. Labrucherie, State Bar # 141051, Ontario (March 23). LaBrucherie, 47, was suspended for one year and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. He was disciplined for failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to communicate with clients, improper withdrawal from representation, engaging in acts of moral turpitude, and failure to cooperate with a State Bar investigation.
In January 1998 a client hired LaBrucherie to represent him in a civil dispute. The client gave LaBrucherie a demand letter from an attorney representing a person who bought a gemstone from the client. In February 1998 opposing counsel sent the client a letter stating his client?s intent to file a lawsuit. In June 1998 the plaintiff filed the lawsuit against the client. In late July 1998 the client brought the complaint to LaBrucherie, who wrote to opposing counsel requesting an agreed-upon date to answer the complaint. LaBrucherie failed to file an answer on behalf of the client.
Between July 1998 and January 1999 the client telephoned LaBrucherie several times and was told that the client?s defense was being pursued. In January 1999 LaBrucherie informed the client that no hearing or trial date was set and that he would give notice of the plaintiff?s deposition and seek dismissal of the case. LaBrucherie failed to depose the plaintiff and failed to file a request for dismissal. In November 1999 LaBrucherie told the client he would cancel the abstract of judgment recorded against him by the plaintiff, and a week later LaBrucherie told the client he would vacate the judgment. He failed to follow through on both promises.
In January 2000 LaBrucherie told the client the judgment was vacated, a statement he knew was not true. In June 2003 the client discovered there was still a lien on his house for the judgment. The client faxed a note to LaBrucherie to take action to remove the lien from his property. LaBrucherie promised to do so, but he failed to take any action to have the lien removed. In December 2003 LaBrucherie continued to make promises to help in removing the lien, but LaBrucherie failed to take any steps to help the client.
In October and November 2004 a bar investigator wrote to LaBrucherie requesting his response to allegations filed against him by the client. He failed to respond to the investigator?s letters.
In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused significant harm to clients. Also, LaBrucherie failed to cooperate with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect April 22.
Donald R. Levitt, State Bar # 101040, San Jose (March 17). Levitt, 55, was suspended for nine months and placed on three years of probation for violating a court order; failure to provide an accounting; violating Penal Code section 242, battery; and engaging in acts of moral turpitude.
In May 2000 Levitt was paid $2,500 to represent a client in a marital dissolution. He took $2,305 as his fees and an additional $195 to pay court costs, leaving no funds in the client trust account that belonged to the client. In June 2000 Levitt sent the client a billing statement that showed the client owed Levitt $192 in fees. About three weeks later the client sent Levitt $2,000 in advance fees. Levitt deposited the check into his business account. After the deposit, the client had a credit of $1,808.
In July 2000 the court ordered the client to pay $1,000 to his wife?s attorney at the rate of $300 per month. In January 2001 Levitt billed the client an additional $2,738 for 14.8 hours of work. After receiving the bill, the client went to Levitt?s office, where they argued about the bill. After their meeting, Levitt performed no further work for the client. Levitt failed to pay the wife?s attorney $1,000, as ordered by the court.
In February 2001, by certified letter, the client terminated Levitt?s services and requested the return of his file and an itemized statement. Levitt refused to accept or sign for the letter. Later, the client suggested they resolve their fee dispute through fee arbitration. In June 2001 the client failed to appear in time for the arbitration. The arbitrator awarded Levitt $1,238, the amount Levitt said the client owed for legal services. In a second matter, in May 2001, a twelve-year-old girl and her friend were riding their go-cart in the girls? neighborhood. The girl operating the go-cart looked back for a dropped object and swerved the go-cart onto Levitt?s driveway, hitting his garbage can. About that time, Levitt drove up in his car. He went over to the girls and angrily questioned the girl operating the go-cart. While questioning her, he raised his hand and hit the child on the side of the face. The girls ran off in opposite directions.
In June 2001 a personal injury complaint was filed against Levitt. In September 2001 he was criminally charged with violating Penal Code section 242, battery. In January 2002 Levitt was found guilty. He was sentenced to 36 months of probation, ordered to attend an anger-management program, and ordered to perform 50 hours of community service by July 2002. In March 2002 the civil jury found for the plaintiff and awarded compensatory damages of $25,000 and punitive damages of $50,000 against Levitt. On Levitt?s cross complaint, the plaintiff also was awarded $1,453. At the time of his probation court appearance in July 2002, Levitt had not completed his community service hours. As a result, the court increased the time of his service to 75 hours and extended the time to complete the service to January 2003. As of the date of the State Bar Court decision, Levitt had not paid any of the $75,000 award.
In aggravation, Levitt had a record of prior discipline. The current matter involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed clients and the administration of justice. He also demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct by failing to pay any amount of the personal injury judgment. In mitigation, the Bar Court gave limited weight to Levitt?s family and financial problems.
The order took effect April 16.
Michael R. Morales, State Bar # 101861, Alhambra (March 23). Morales, 49, was suspended for 90 days and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. He was disciplined for failure to comply with conditions to a private reproval.
In July 2004 Morales received a public reproval after being found culpable of attorney misconduct. Conditions to the reproval required Morales to submit quarterly probation reports, submit quarterly substance-abuse reports, and with each probation report to submit proof of attending substance-abuse treatments five times per week during the time the reproval was in effect. Morales failed to comply with the conditions by failure to submit quarterly probation reports, failure to submit quarterly substance-abuse reports, and failure to submit proof of attending substance-abuse treatment meetings.
In aggravation, Morales had a record of prior discipline. In the current matter, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing by failing to comply with conditions to the reproval. Also, he failed to participate in the bar proceedings.
The order took effect April 22.
Ulysses G. Plummer III, State Bar # 86628, Los Angeles (March 23). Plummer, 64, was suspended for three years and until he makes restitution of $13,251 to the client security fund and $500 to a client. He will remain suspended until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension and until he provides proof of his rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and ability in the law. He was disciplined for failure to comply with conditions to a previous order of discipline.
In aggravation, Plummer had a record of prior discipline. In the current discipline, he engaged in multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed the administration of justice. He also demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct by failing to make restitution or attend courses in ethics and law practice management. Also, he failed to participate during the State Bar proceedings before entry of his default.
The order took effect April 22.
Cheryl A. Podbielski, State Bar # 134570, Torrance (April 18). Podbielski, 48, was suspended for 30 days and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. She was disciplined for improper withdrawal from representation and failure to cooperate with a State Bar investigation.
In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed Podbielski?s client. Also, she failed to participate during the bar?s proceedings.
The order took effect May 18.
Roya Rohani, State Bar # 193175, Laguna Woods (April 18). Rohani, 48, was suspended for two months and placed on two years of probation for failure to obey a court order, failure to comply with conditions to a public reproval, and failure to perform legal services with competence.
In aggravation, Rohani had a record of prior discipline, the underlying public reproval. In mitigation, Rohani cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings. The State Bar Court also found that she acted in good faith.
The order took effect May 18.
J. Tony Serra, State Bar # 32639, San Francisco (March 23). Serra, 71, was suspended for six months and placed on two years of probation for violating federal income tax laws.
From 1991 to 2001 Serra filed federal income tax returns but failed to pay taxes on earned income. His tax returns overstated the amount of taxes he owed because he did not account for allowable business-expense deductions. Serra was ordered to pay the Internal Revenue Service $100,000 for tax years 1997 to 2001.
In aggravation, Serra had a record of prior discipline. Also, the current misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, Serra?s many supporters in the legal community attested to his good character and reputation.
The order took effect April 22.
Scott A. Smith, State Bar # 182359, Fullerton (April 18). Smith, 53, had his previous probation revoked, the previously ordered stay of suspension lifted, and a new order issued in which he was suspended for two years and until he provides proof of his rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and ability in the law. Smith was given credit toward the period of his actual suspension for the period of involuntary inactive enrollment, which began on December 25.
In March 2005 Smith was suspended for 90 days and placed on three years of probation for failure to maintain client funds in trust, commingling funds, issuing checks against insufficient funds in the client trust account, and engaging in acts of moral turpitude. Smith was found culpable in four client matters involving violations of his client trust account. Conditions to the discipline required him to provide to the State Bar proof of treatment by a psychologist or psychiatrist, plus copies of a written release waiving his right to privacy. He also was to submit a consultation report by his physician every three months, submit written reports from his psychologist or psychiatrist every six months, and submit proof of attending and passing the bar?s client trust accounting school. Smith failed to submit proof that he gave his physician and psychotherapist a copy of the stipulation or the waiver, and he failed to submit proof that he completed client trust accounting school.
In aggravation, Smith had a record of prior discipline, the underlying matter. In the current matter, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused significant harm to the administration of justice. He also demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct by failing to comply with conditions to the probation.
The order took effect May 18.
Richard G. Tarlow, State Bar # 72889, Calabasas (April 18). Tarlow, 62, was suspended for 30 days and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. He was disciplined for failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to keep a client reasonably informed about significant developments in the client?s case, and failure to cooperate with a bar investigation.
In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused some harm to the client. Also, Tarlow failed to participate in the State Bar?s proceedings before entry of his default.
The order took effect May 18.
John F. Wanvig, State Bar # 120390, Garden Grove (April 18). Wanvig, 53, was suspended for 60 days and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. Wanvig was disciplined for failure to perform legal services with competence; engaging in acts of moral turpitude, corruption, or dishonesty; misrepresentation; and making a misrepresentation to the State Bar.
In aggravation, Wanvig failed to participate during the disciplinary proceedings. In mitigation, Wanvig had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1985.
The order took effect May 18.
INTERIM SUSPENSION
Michael Austin, State Bar # 143023, Tracy (March 22). Austin, 51, was placed on interim suspension after his conviction for violating Penal Code section 187, murder. The interim suspension will remain in effect until further order by the State Bar Court.
The order took effect April 22.
Julie A. Palaferri, State Bar # 140719, Carlsbad (March 23). Palaferri, 48, was placed on interim suspension after her conviction for violating Health and Safety Code section 11377(a), possession of a controlled substance. The interim suspension will remain in effect until further order by the State Bar Court.
The order took effect April 23.
Milton G. Wolf, State Bar # 113900, Van Nuys (March 22). Wolf, 59, was placed on interim suspension after his conviction for violating Penal Code section 487, grand theft. The interim suspension will remain in effect until further order by the State Bar Court.
The order took effect April 22.
PROBATION
Steven J. Alpers, State Bar # 75683, Fremont (April 18). Alpers, 53, was placed on two years of probation for failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to respond to client inquiries, and failure to return unearned fees.
In aggravation, Alpers had a record of prior discipline.
In mitigation, Alpers cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect May 18.
Donnalee H. Huffman, State Bar # 60021, Bakersfield (March 23). Huffman, 73, was placed on three years of probation for failure to perform legal services with competence and improper withdrawal from representation.
In aggravation, Huffman had a record of prior discipline. The State Bar Court noted that the 2005 discipline should not be considered a prior because the current matter predates the 2005 misconduct. In mitigation, Huffman cooperated with the bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect April 22.
Ronald J. Isles, State Bar # 176096, Orange (March 23). Isles, 40, was placed on two years of probation for failure to comply with conditions to a public reproval.
In aggravation, Isles had a record of prior discipline, the underlying matter. In mitigation, he cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect April 22.
Michael A. Lotta, State Bar # 94301, Long Beach (March 23). Lotta, 55, was placed on one year of probation for failure to promptly pay out funds on behalf of a client.
In aggravation, Lotta had a record of prior discipline. In mitigation, he cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect April 22.
PUBLIC REPROVAL
Sean L. Andrews, State Bar # 171711, Los Angeles (April 12). Andrews, 47, received a public reproval for failure to perform legal services with competence.
In mitigation, Andrews had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1994.
The order took effect May 3.
Edward B. Chatoian, State Bar # 63957, Fresno (March 8). Chatoian, 58, received a public reproval for failure to promptly pay out funds to a client, failure to perform legal services with competence, and failure to communicate by failing to keep a client reasonably informed about significant developments in the client?s case.
In aggravation, the misconduct caused harm to clients, the public, and the administration of justice. In mitigation, Chatoian cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect March 29.
Xavier V. Chavez, State Bar # 174470, Cerritos (March 16). Chavez, 43, received a public reproval following his conviction for violating Penal Code section 148(a)(1), resisting, obstructing, or delaying a peace officer.
In September 2001 Chavez allegedly violated a traffic law and was pursued by a police officer. Chavez continued to his home nearby and entered his driveway. An altercation between Chavez and the police officer led to the arrest of Chavez and his wife. Later, they were convicted of resisting arrest.
After conviction, Chavez sued the police officer and the Cerritos Police Department under 42 U.S.C. section 1983, alleging violations of his civil and constitutional rights due to his arrest. The civil action resulted in a judgment in favor of Chavez, and his motion for punitive damages was granted. The civil proceeding remained pending at the time of the State Bar Court?s decision in this matter. Chavez continues to seek habeas relief from his conviction in state and federal courts.
The order took effect April 6.
Patrick R. Foley, State Bar # 65811, Harbor, Oregon (April 5). Foley, 62, received a public reproval for failure to maintain a legal or just action in Oregon.
In April 2003 Foley filed a petition for dissolution of marriage on behalf of his client. In June 2003 he issued a notice of deposition and subpoena for financial documents from the client?s wife?s credit union. Foley failed to send copies of the notice of deposition and subpoena to opposing counsel. In June 2004 opposing counsel requested that Foley send copies. A few days later, opposing counsel made a second request for copies. Several days later, Foley served a second notice of deposition and subpoena on the wife?s credit union requesting the same financial documents, but he again failed to serve copies on opposing counsel. In July 2003 Foley prepared and served a third notice of deposition and subpoena requesting the financial documents, and again failed to serve copies of the deposition notice and subpoena on opposing counsel. In June 2005 Foley agreed to a stipulation for discipline with the Oregon State Bar. He admitted to engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and intentionally or habitually violating established rules of Oregon procedure.
In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused significant harm to his client, the public, or the administration of justice. In mitigation, Foley had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the California Bar in 1975. Also, he cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings and demonstrated remorse for his misconduct.
The order took effect April 26.
Robert D. Simcoe, State Bar # 96696, Grants Pass, Oregon (March 29). Simcoe, 62, received a public reproval for failure to perform legal services with competence.
In aggravation, Simcoe had a record of prior discipline in Oregon. In the current matter, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, Simcoe cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect April 15.
REINSTATEMENT
Andrew M. Cohen, State Bar # 42754, Menlo Park (March 24). Cohen, 65, by order of the state Supreme Court dated March 24, was reinstated as a member of the State Bar. At the time of his resignation, there were no disciplinary charges pending against Cohen.
The reinstatement takes effect upon payment of fees and taking the oath as required by law.
Eric L. Holt, State Bar # 176153, Valencia (March 23). Holt, 45, was disbarred for failure to comply with rule 955 of the Rules of Court.
In March 2005 Holt was suspended for six months and until he made restitution of $7,913 to one client and until the State Bar Court granted a motion terminating the suspension. He was disciplined for failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to communicate with clients, failure to cooperate with a State Bar investigation, and failure to comply with conditions to a December 2003 private reproval. Conditions to the 2005 discipline required Holt to comply with rule 955 of the Rules of Court by notifying clients and opposing counsel of his suspension within 30 days and filing an affidavit of compliance within 40 days. He failed to file the affidavit and failed to provide an explanation to the bar for his noncompliance.
In aggravation, Holt had a record of prior discipline, private reprovals in January 2002 and December 2003. In the current matter, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed clients. By failing to comply with the imposed conditions, Holt demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct. Also, he failed to participate with the bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect April 22.
SUSPENSION
Richard E. Ackerknecht, State Bar # 132175, Los Angeles (March 10). Ackerknecht, 45, was suspended for 30 days and placed on 24 months of probation following his conviction for violating Health and Safety Code section 11350(a) and Penal Code section 484(a).
In June 1999 Ackerknecht was arrested by department store security for shoplifting two shirts. At the time of his arrest, the police found he was holding five small containers of heroin. In August 1999 Ackerknecht pleaded no contest to violating Penal Code section 484(a), theft of property; and Health and Safety Code section 11350(a), possession of a controlled substance. He was ordered not to use or possess any narcotics or restricted or dangerous drugs and to pay fees and fines of $250. In February 2000 Ackerknecht was sentenced to 24 months of summary probation, and he was ordered to perform 100 hours of community service work and pay a restitution fee of $100. In February 2001 he pleaded guilty to the deferred felony count of Health and Safety Code section 11350(a). The deferred entry of judgment was terminated and the case was dismissed. In January 2002 the guilty plea to the possession of a controlled substance was dismissed and a not guilty plea was entered. The misdemeanor theft count involved an act of moral turpitude.
In October 2004 Ackerknecht was in a grocery store when store security observed him placing seven or eight items into his backpack. He paid for the groceries in the cart, but he did not pay for the items in his backpack. When approached by store security, Ackerknecht said he was financially unstable. The security officers found Ackerknecht carrying $4,000 in cash, four credit cards, and a checkbook. In March 2005 he pleaded nolo contendere to violating Penal Code section 484(a). He was placed on 36 months of summary probation and ordered to serve 15 days in county jail and pay a fine of $500 or perform 16 days of roadside work. The fees and fines totaled $1,645.
In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, Ackerknecht had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1987. He also cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect April 9.
Robert K. Andres, State Bar # 104018, Burlington, Vermont (March 23). Andres, 51, was suspended for three years and until he provides proof of his rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and ability in the law. After his misconduct in Vermont, he was disciplined in California for attorney misconduct for failure to perform legal services with competence and failure to obey the laws of the United States, Vermont, and California.
In 2000 Andres was appointed to represent a criminal defendant in a postconviction petition for relief of a Vermont superior court order. In October 2000 Andres filed an amended petition for the client. Andres conducted an investigation of the case by talking to the client?s prior attorney and listening to a tape of the client?s guilty plea. In June 2001 the Vermont superior court notified Andres of a pretrial conference scheduled for July 2001. Andres failed to appear for the conference. The conference judge was also the sentencing judge, and under Vermont law the sentencing judge cannot hear a petition for postconviction relief. Andres failed to have the client?s petition heard by another judge.
In July 2001 the state filed a motion for summary judgment for dismissal of the client?s petition. Andres made the decision not to file an opposition, believing that the client had no defense to the state?s motion. In September 2001 the court granted the motion and dismissed the client?s petition. The client, without using Andres, filed an appeal. Later, the parties agreed to vacate the court?s ruling and remanded the matter to a different judge.
In September 2002 the Vermont Professional Responsibility Board found that Andres violated the Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct by failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing his client. The finding was based on his failure to attend the pretrial conference and failure to respond to the state?s motion for summary judgment. Andres was disciplined for professional misconduct by the Vermont Supreme Court.
In a second matter, in August 2001 Andres and his girlfriend entered a bar. Also in the bar were his girlfriend?s ex-husband and the ex-husband?s girlfriend. After the ex-husband and his girlfriend left the bar, Andres verified with another person at the bar that the man in a wheelchair was the ex-husband. Andres confronted the ex-husband with his belief that the ex-husband had harassed Andres and his girlfriend.
While the ex-husband was getting into his van, Andres punched the ex-husband. In April 2002 Andres was convicted of simple assault and sentenced to three months in jail. The sentence was stayed, and Andres was placed on probation with conditions. The probation conditions included that Andres not enter establishments that serve alcohol and that he not purchase, possess, or drink alcoholic beverages. In July 2002 he violated his probation by entering a bar and consuming alcohol.
In August 2002 Andres?s probation was revoked, and he was ordered to serve the ordered jail time. Later, disciplinary charges were filed against him by the Vermont State Bar. In September 2002 he was placed on interim suspension by the Vermont Bar. In February 2003 the board found Andres culpable of the assault. Andres was suspended for three years in Vermont without being given credit for the period of his interim suspension.
In aggravation, Andres had a record of prior discipline in California. In 2000 he was placed on one year of probation. In the current matter, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing and failure to cooperate with State Bar proceedings before entry of his default.
The order took effect April 22.
Stephen L. Burton, State Bar # 113748, Sherman Oaks (April 18). Burton, 51, was suspended for 30 days and placed on two years of probation after being found culpable in four client matters of engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, engaging in misleading advertising, and failure to promptly return unearned fees.
In 2004 Burton ran an Internet advertisement for the Foreclosure Recovery Center, which claimed to help homeowners save their homes that were about to be sold in foreclosure. The four clients that hired Burton owned property in Illinois, Georgia, Florida, and Arizona. Burton was admitted to practice law only in California. The State Bar Court found that Burton?s advertisements contained false and deceptive information or tended to confuse, deceive, or mislead the public. He also failed to promptly return unearned fees by waiting until the State Bar was involved. In September 2005 Burton returned unearned fees to the four clients.
In aggravation, Burton had a record of prior discipline. In the current matter, the misconduct caused significant harm to clients and to the administration of justice. In mitigation, after the State Bar became involved, Burton discontinued the Foreclosure Recovery Center, and he removed his Internet advertisements.
The order took effect May 18.
Arnold Chin, State Bar # 95797, San Francisco (April 18). Chin, 58, was suspended for six months and placed on three years of probation for failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to communicate by failing to inform a client about the status of a case, improper withdrawal from representation, failure to promptly release client papers and property, failure to provide an itemized statement of disbursed funds, failure to maintain client funds in trust, and commingling funds.
In aggravation, Chin had a record of prior discipline. In the current discipline, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, at the time of his misconduct Chin suffered extreme family turmoil and the death of both parents.
The order took effect May 18.
Roger A. Gerdes, State Bar # 158701, Carpinteria (March 17). Gerdes, 55, was suspended for six months and until he makes restitution of $3,000 to one client and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. He was disciplined for entering into an improper business transaction with a client and failure to cooperate with a State Bar investigation.
In 2002 Gerdes was hired to represent a client in a family trust matter. In March 2003 he asked the client for a loan of $3,000. Gerdes provided the client with an unsecured promissory note, agreeing to repay $3,400 by April 2003. Gerdes failed to obtain the client?s informed written consent to the loan, failed to advise the client in writing of the client?s right to seek the advice of independent counsel, failed to give the client time to seek advice about the loan, and failed to repay the loan as promised.
In September 2004 a bar investigator wrote to Gerdes requesting a written response to allegations filed against him by the client. Gerdes failed to respond to the investigator?s letter.
In aggravation, Gerdes had a record of prior discipline. In the current matter, the misconduct harmed a client, and Gerdes demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct.
The order took effect April 16.
George A. Harris III, State Bar # 178771, Oakland (April 18). Harris, 43, was suspended for six months and until he makes restitution of $1,000 to one client and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. He was disciplined for failure to perform legal services with competence, improper withdrawal from representation, failure to maintain client funds in trust, commingling funds, misrepresenting facts to a client, engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, failure to cooperate with a State Bar investigation, and failure to report court-imposed sanctions to the bar.
In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. Also, Harris failed to cooperate with the bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect May 18.
Clinton A. Johnson, State Bar # 57407, Oakland (March 23). Johnson, 62, was suspended for 90 days for failure to maintain client funds in trust and misappropriation.
In mitigation, Johnson had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1973. No clients were harmed by the misconduct, and Johnson restored funds before bar involvement. Also, at the time of the misconduct, Johnson suffered severe financial stress. Between April and August 2003 the client in the current matter owed Johnson approximately $50,000 in fees. Between August and November 2003 the same client owed him $75,000 in fees. In an unrelated case, another client owed $70,000 to Johnson in legal fees.
The order took effect April 22.
John R. Labrucherie, State Bar # 141051, Ontario (March 23). LaBrucherie, 47, was suspended for one year and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. He was disciplined for failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to communicate with clients, improper withdrawal from representation, engaging in acts of moral turpitude, and failure to cooperate with a State Bar investigation.
In January 1998 a client hired LaBrucherie to represent him in a civil dispute. The client gave LaBrucherie a demand letter from an attorney representing a person who bought a gemstone from the client. In February 1998 opposing counsel sent the client a letter stating his client?s intent to file a lawsuit. In June 1998 the plaintiff filed the lawsuit against the client. In late July 1998 the client brought the complaint to LaBrucherie, who wrote to opposing counsel requesting an agreed-upon date to answer the complaint. LaBrucherie failed to file an answer on behalf of the client.
Between July 1998 and January 1999 the client telephoned LaBrucherie several times and was told that the client?s defense was being pursued. In January 1999 LaBrucherie informed the client that no hearing or trial date was set and that he would give notice of the plaintiff?s deposition and seek dismissal of the case. LaBrucherie failed to depose the plaintiff and failed to file a request for dismissal. In November 1999 LaBrucherie told the client he would cancel the abstract of judgment recorded against him by the plaintiff, and a week later LaBrucherie told the client he would vacate the judgment. He failed to follow through on both promises.
In January 2000 LaBrucherie told the client the judgment was vacated, a statement he knew was not true. In June 2003 the client discovered there was still a lien on his house for the judgment. The client faxed a note to LaBrucherie to take action to remove the lien from his property. LaBrucherie promised to do so, but he failed to take any action to have the lien removed. In December 2003 LaBrucherie continued to make promises to help in removing the lien, but LaBrucherie failed to take any steps to help the client.
In October and November 2004 a bar investigator wrote to LaBrucherie requesting his response to allegations filed against him by the client. He failed to respond to the investigator?s letters.
In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused significant harm to clients. Also, LaBrucherie failed to cooperate with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect April 22.
Donald R. Levitt, State Bar # 101040, San Jose (March 17). Levitt, 55, was suspended for nine months and placed on three years of probation for violating a court order; failure to provide an accounting; violating Penal Code section 242, battery; and engaging in acts of moral turpitude.
In May 2000 Levitt was paid $2,500 to represent a client in a marital dissolution. He took $2,305 as his fees and an additional $195 to pay court costs, leaving no funds in the client trust account that belonged to the client. In June 2000 Levitt sent the client a billing statement that showed the client owed Levitt $192 in fees. About three weeks later the client sent Levitt $2,000 in advance fees. Levitt deposited the check into his business account. After the deposit, the client had a credit of $1,808.
In July 2000 the court ordered the client to pay $1,000 to his wife?s attorney at the rate of $300 per month. In January 2001 Levitt billed the client an additional $2,738 for 14.8 hours of work. After receiving the bill, the client went to Levitt?s office, where they argued about the bill. After their meeting, Levitt performed no further work for the client. Levitt failed to pay the wife?s attorney $1,000, as ordered by the court.
In February 2001, by certified letter, the client terminated Levitt?s services and requested the return of his file and an itemized statement. Levitt refused to accept or sign for the letter. Later, the client suggested they resolve their fee dispute through fee arbitration. In June 2001 the client failed to appear in time for the arbitration. The arbitrator awarded Levitt $1,238, the amount Levitt said the client owed for legal services. In a second matter, in May 2001, a twelve-year-old girl and her friend were riding their go-cart in the girls? neighborhood. The girl operating the go-cart looked back for a dropped object and swerved the go-cart onto Levitt?s driveway, hitting his garbage can. About that time, Levitt drove up in his car. He went over to the girls and angrily questioned the girl operating the go-cart. While questioning her, he raised his hand and hit the child on the side of the face. The girls ran off in opposite directions.
In June 2001 a personal injury complaint was filed against Levitt. In September 2001 he was criminally charged with violating Penal Code section 242, battery. In January 2002 Levitt was found guilty. He was sentenced to 36 months of probation, ordered to attend an anger-management program, and ordered to perform 50 hours of community service by July 2002. In March 2002 the civil jury found for the plaintiff and awarded compensatory damages of $25,000 and punitive damages of $50,000 against Levitt. On Levitt?s cross complaint, the plaintiff also was awarded $1,453. At the time of his probation court appearance in July 2002, Levitt had not completed his community service hours. As a result, the court increased the time of his service to 75 hours and extended the time to complete the service to January 2003. As of the date of the State Bar Court decision, Levitt had not paid any of the $75,000 award.
In aggravation, Levitt had a record of prior discipline. The current matter involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed clients and the administration of justice. He also demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct by failing to pay any amount of the personal injury judgment. In mitigation, the Bar Court gave limited weight to Levitt?s family and financial problems.
The order took effect April 16.
Michael R. Morales, State Bar # 101861, Alhambra (March 23). Morales, 49, was suspended for 90 days and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. He was disciplined for failure to comply with conditions to a private reproval.
In July 2004 Morales received a public reproval after being found culpable of attorney misconduct. Conditions to the reproval required Morales to submit quarterly probation reports, submit quarterly substance-abuse reports, and with each probation report to submit proof of attending substance-abuse treatments five times per week during the time the reproval was in effect. Morales failed to comply with the conditions by failure to submit quarterly probation reports, failure to submit quarterly substance-abuse reports, and failure to submit proof of attending substance-abuse treatment meetings.
In aggravation, Morales had a record of prior discipline. In the current matter, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing by failing to comply with conditions to the reproval. Also, he failed to participate in the bar proceedings.
The order took effect April 22.
Ulysses G. Plummer III, State Bar # 86628, Los Angeles (March 23). Plummer, 64, was suspended for three years and until he makes restitution of $13,251 to the client security fund and $500 to a client. He will remain suspended until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension and until he provides proof of his rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and ability in the law. He was disciplined for failure to comply with conditions to a previous order of discipline.
In aggravation, Plummer had a record of prior discipline. In the current discipline, he engaged in multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed the administration of justice. He also demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct by failing to make restitution or attend courses in ethics and law practice management. Also, he failed to participate during the State Bar proceedings before entry of his default.
The order took effect April 22.
Cheryl A. Podbielski, State Bar # 134570, Torrance (April 18). Podbielski, 48, was suspended for 30 days and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. She was disciplined for improper withdrawal from representation and failure to cooperate with a State Bar investigation.
In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed Podbielski?s client. Also, she failed to participate during the bar?s proceedings.
The order took effect May 18.
Roya Rohani, State Bar # 193175, Laguna Woods (April 18). Rohani, 48, was suspended for two months and placed on two years of probation for failure to obey a court order, failure to comply with conditions to a public reproval, and failure to perform legal services with competence.
In aggravation, Rohani had a record of prior discipline, the underlying public reproval. In mitigation, Rohani cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings. The State Bar Court also found that she acted in good faith.
The order took effect May 18.
J. Tony Serra, State Bar # 32639, San Francisco (March 23). Serra, 71, was suspended for six months and placed on two years of probation for violating federal income tax laws.
From 1991 to 2001 Serra filed federal income tax returns but failed to pay taxes on earned income. His tax returns overstated the amount of taxes he owed because he did not account for allowable business-expense deductions. Serra was ordered to pay the Internal Revenue Service $100,000 for tax years 1997 to 2001.
In aggravation, Serra had a record of prior discipline. Also, the current misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, Serra?s many supporters in the legal community attested to his good character and reputation.
The order took effect April 22.
Scott A. Smith, State Bar # 182359, Fullerton (April 18). Smith, 53, had his previous probation revoked, the previously ordered stay of suspension lifted, and a new order issued in which he was suspended for two years and until he provides proof of his rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and ability in the law. Smith was given credit toward the period of his actual suspension for the period of involuntary inactive enrollment, which began on December 25.
In March 2005 Smith was suspended for 90 days and placed on three years of probation for failure to maintain client funds in trust, commingling funds, issuing checks against insufficient funds in the client trust account, and engaging in acts of moral turpitude. Smith was found culpable in four client matters involving violations of his client trust account. Conditions to the discipline required him to provide to the State Bar proof of treatment by a psychologist or psychiatrist, plus copies of a written release waiving his right to privacy. He also was to submit a consultation report by his physician every three months, submit written reports from his psychologist or psychiatrist every six months, and submit proof of attending and passing the bar?s client trust accounting school. Smith failed to submit proof that he gave his physician and psychotherapist a copy of the stipulation or the waiver, and he failed to submit proof that he completed client trust accounting school.
In aggravation, Smith had a record of prior discipline, the underlying matter. In the current matter, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused significant harm to the administration of justice. He also demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct by failing to comply with conditions to the probation.
The order took effect May 18.
Richard G. Tarlow, State Bar # 72889, Calabasas (April 18). Tarlow, 62, was suspended for 30 days and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. He was disciplined for failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to keep a client reasonably informed about significant developments in the client?s case, and failure to cooperate with a bar investigation.
In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused some harm to the client. Also, Tarlow failed to participate in the State Bar?s proceedings before entry of his default.
The order took effect May 18.
John F. Wanvig, State Bar # 120390, Garden Grove (April 18). Wanvig, 53, was suspended for 60 days and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. Wanvig was disciplined for failure to perform legal services with competence; engaging in acts of moral turpitude, corruption, or dishonesty; misrepresentation; and making a misrepresentation to the State Bar.
In aggravation, Wanvig failed to participate during the disciplinary proceedings. In mitigation, Wanvig had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1985.
The order took effect May 18.
INTERIM SUSPENSION
Michael Austin, State Bar # 143023, Tracy (March 22). Austin, 51, was placed on interim suspension after his conviction for violating Penal Code section 187, murder. The interim suspension will remain in effect until further order by the State Bar Court.
The order took effect April 22.
Julie A. Palaferri, State Bar # 140719, Carlsbad (March 23). Palaferri, 48, was placed on interim suspension after her conviction for violating Health and Safety Code section 11377(a), possession of a controlled substance. The interim suspension will remain in effect until further order by the State Bar Court.
The order took effect April 23.
Milton G. Wolf, State Bar # 113900, Van Nuys (March 22). Wolf, 59, was placed on interim suspension after his conviction for violating Penal Code section 487, grand theft. The interim suspension will remain in effect until further order by the State Bar Court.
The order took effect April 22.
PROBATION
Steven J. Alpers, State Bar # 75683, Fremont (April 18). Alpers, 53, was placed on two years of probation for failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to respond to client inquiries, and failure to return unearned fees.
In aggravation, Alpers had a record of prior discipline.
In mitigation, Alpers cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect May 18.
Donnalee H. Huffman, State Bar # 60021, Bakersfield (March 23). Huffman, 73, was placed on three years of probation for failure to perform legal services with competence and improper withdrawal from representation.
In aggravation, Huffman had a record of prior discipline. The State Bar Court noted that the 2005 discipline should not be considered a prior because the current matter predates the 2005 misconduct. In mitigation, Huffman cooperated with the bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect April 22.
Ronald J. Isles, State Bar # 176096, Orange (March 23). Isles, 40, was placed on two years of probation for failure to comply with conditions to a public reproval.
In aggravation, Isles had a record of prior discipline, the underlying matter. In mitigation, he cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect April 22.
Michael A. Lotta, State Bar # 94301, Long Beach (March 23). Lotta, 55, was placed on one year of probation for failure to promptly pay out funds on behalf of a client.
In aggravation, Lotta had a record of prior discipline. In mitigation, he cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect April 22.
PUBLIC REPROVAL
Sean L. Andrews, State Bar # 171711, Los Angeles (April 12). Andrews, 47, received a public reproval for failure to perform legal services with competence.
In mitigation, Andrews had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1994.
The order took effect May 3.
Edward B. Chatoian, State Bar # 63957, Fresno (March 8). Chatoian, 58, received a public reproval for failure to promptly pay out funds to a client, failure to perform legal services with competence, and failure to communicate by failing to keep a client reasonably informed about significant developments in the client?s case.
In aggravation, the misconduct caused harm to clients, the public, and the administration of justice. In mitigation, Chatoian cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect March 29.
Xavier V. Chavez, State Bar # 174470, Cerritos (March 16). Chavez, 43, received a public reproval following his conviction for violating Penal Code section 148(a)(1), resisting, obstructing, or delaying a peace officer.
In September 2001 Chavez allegedly violated a traffic law and was pursued by a police officer. Chavez continued to his home nearby and entered his driveway. An altercation between Chavez and the police officer led to the arrest of Chavez and his wife. Later, they were convicted of resisting arrest.
After conviction, Chavez sued the police officer and the Cerritos Police Department under 42 U.S.C. section 1983, alleging violations of his civil and constitutional rights due to his arrest. The civil action resulted in a judgment in favor of Chavez, and his motion for punitive damages was granted. The civil proceeding remained pending at the time of the State Bar Court?s decision in this matter. Chavez continues to seek habeas relief from his conviction in state and federal courts.
The order took effect April 6.
Patrick R. Foley, State Bar # 65811, Harbor, Oregon (April 5). Foley, 62, received a public reproval for failure to maintain a legal or just action in Oregon.
In April 2003 Foley filed a petition for dissolution of marriage on behalf of his client. In June 2003 he issued a notice of deposition and subpoena for financial documents from the client?s wife?s credit union. Foley failed to send copies of the notice of deposition and subpoena to opposing counsel. In June 2004 opposing counsel requested that Foley send copies. A few days later, opposing counsel made a second request for copies. Several days later, Foley served a second notice of deposition and subpoena on the wife?s credit union requesting the same financial documents, but he again failed to serve copies on opposing counsel. In July 2003 Foley prepared and served a third notice of deposition and subpoena requesting the financial documents, and again failed to serve copies of the deposition notice and subpoena on opposing counsel. In June 2005 Foley agreed to a stipulation for discipline with the Oregon State Bar. He admitted to engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and intentionally or habitually violating established rules of Oregon procedure.
In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused significant harm to his client, the public, or the administration of justice. In mitigation, Foley had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the California Bar in 1975. Also, he cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings and demonstrated remorse for his misconduct.
The order took effect April 26.
Robert D. Simcoe, State Bar # 96696, Grants Pass, Oregon (March 29). Simcoe, 62, received a public reproval for failure to perform legal services with competence.
In aggravation, Simcoe had a record of prior discipline in Oregon. In the current matter, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, Simcoe cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
The order took effect April 15.
REINSTATEMENT
Andrew M. Cohen, State Bar # 42754, Menlo Park (March 24). Cohen, 65, by order of the state Supreme Court dated March 24, was reinstated as a member of the State Bar. At the time of his resignation, there were no disciplinary charges pending against Cohen.
The reinstatement takes effect upon payment of fees and taking the oath as required by law.
#335180
Annie Gausn
Daily Journal Staff Writer
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424
Send a letter to the editor:
Email: letters@dailyjournal.com