Discipline Report

     
      DISBARMENT
      Stephan Z. Cutler, State Bar # 63998, Long Beach (February 10). Cutler, 59, was disbarred after being found culpable of failure to maintain client funds in trust, misappropriating funds, engaging in acts of moral turpitude, failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to return unearned fees, and failure to cooperate with a State Bar investigation.
     
      In aggravation, Cutler had a record of prior discipline. In the current misconduct, Cutler engaged in multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused significant harm to his clients. He demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct. Also, he failed to participate in the bar proceedings before entry of his default.
     
      The order took effect March 12.
       
      Daniel B. Dorfman, State Bar # 152430, La Quinta (January 25). Dorfman, 41, was summarily disbarred after his conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. section 1341, mail fraud, a felony. In June 2005 Dorfman had been placed on interim suspension following his conviction.
     
      The order took effect February 24.
     
      Mylik R. Harrington, State Bar # 213894, Los Angeles (February 10). Harrington, 31, was disbarred after being found culpable in four client matters for failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to return client papers and property, failure to return unearned fees, accepting fees from a nonclient, charging and collecting an unconscionable fee, failure to communicate, failure to maintain client funds in trust, misappropriating funds, failure to promptly pay out funds to a client, engaging in acts of moral turpitude, and failure to cooperate with four State Bar investigations.
     
      In aggravation, Harrington had a record of prior discipline. In the current matter, Harrington's misconduct harmed clients, and he demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct by failing to return any of the unearned fees. Also, he failed to cooperate with the bar during its investigations and proceedings.
     
      The order took effect March 12.
     
      Leslie L. Hartwell, State Bar # 66139, Hollywood (February 23). Hartwell, 56, was disbarred for failure to comply with rule 955 of the Rules of Court.
     
      In February 2005 Hartwell was suspended for one year and until he made restitution of $1,800 to two clients and until the State Bar Court granted a motion terminating his suspension. He was disciplined for failure to obey a court order by failing to comply with conditions to a previous discipline order. Conditions to the discipline required Hartwell to comply with rule 955 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, Hartwell had a record of prior discipline. In the current discipline, Hartwell demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct by failing to comply with rule 955. His failure to participate in the disciplinary matter was a further factor in aggravation.
     
      The order took effect March 25.
     
      RESIGNATION
      The following attorneys resigned from the bar with unspecified disciplinary charges pending. Their resignations were accepted without prejudice to further disciplinary proceedings should they seek reinstatement.
     
      Bryan D. Kamenetz, State Bar # 208678, Los Angeles (February 10). Kamenetz, 35, resigned from the bar on January 10.
     
      The order took effect March 12.
     
      Charles P. LeBeau, State Bar # 127532, San Diego (February 10). LeBeau, 61, resigned from the bar on January 6.
     
      The order took effect March 12.
     
      Ronald D. Schenck, State Bar # 33975, Wallowa, Oregon (February 10). Schenck, 73, resigned from the bar on February 1.
     
      The order took effect March 12.
     
      SUSPENSION
      Maxwell C. Agha, State Bar # 153625, San Diego (January 11). Agha, 47, was suspended for 30 days and placed on one year of probation for failure to comply with a court order and failure to timely comply with rule 955 of the Rules
      of Court.
     
      In December 2004 Agha was suspended for 90 days and placed on two years of probation after being found culpable of aiding another in the unauthorized practice of law, attempting to mislead a judge, failure to perform legal services with competence by failing to adequately supervise a nonattorney employee, and engaging in acts of moral turpitude. Conditions to the discipline required Agha to, among other things, comply with rule 955 by notifying clients and opposing counsel of his suspension within 30 days and filing an affidavit of compliance within 40 days. He failed to timely notify the client of his suspension, failed to timely file the affidavit, and failed to provide an explanation to the State Bar for his noncompliance with the rule.
     
      In aggravation, Agha had a record of prior discipline, the underlying matter. In mitigation, no clients were harmed by the misconduct and Agha acted in good faith after being misinformed by the State Bar Probation Department of the effective date for the rule 955 compliance.
     
      The order took effect February 10.
     
      Carole A. Bell, State Bar # 122753, London, England (February 10). Bell, 59, was suspended for one year and placed on three years of probation for failure to promptly comply with rule 955 of the Rules of Court.
     
      In September 2004 Bell was suspended for 30 days and until the State Bar Court granted a motion terminating her suspension. She was disciplined for failure to comply with the laws of California, failure to maintain a current address with the State Bar, and failure to cooperate with the bar during its investigation and proceedings. Conditions to the discipline required Bell to comply with rule 955 by notifying clients and opposing counsel of her suspension within 30 days and filing an affidavit of compliance within 40 days. She failed to file the affidavit, which was due in February 2005, until August 2005. Bell did not receive notice of the rule 955 compliance because she had relocated to England without notifying the bar's Membership Records Department of her new address.
     
      In aggravation, Bell had a record of prior discipline, the underlying matter. In mitigation, no clients were harmed by Bell's misconduct. She also demonstrated remorse and acted in good faith.
     
      The order took effect March 12.
     
      Mark I. Blankenship, State Bar # 130506, Riverside (January 25). Blankenship, 45, was suspended for nine months and placed on five years of probation after being found culpable in seven client matters. He failed to perform legal services with competence, failed to communicate, failed to provide an accounting, failed to keep clients reasonably informed about significant developments in cases, and improperly withdrew from representation. He also was ordered to make restitution of $15,250 to four clients. In August 2005 Blankenship made partial payments of $2,250 to three clients, and he paid $960 to another client in response to a memorandum of costs filed by the defendants.
     
      In aggravation, Blankenship had a record of prior discipline. In the current matter, the misconduct harmed clients. In mitigation, Blankenship cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
     
      The order took effect February 24.
     
      Joshua M. Dale, State Bar # 170126, San Francisco (January 4). Dale, 44, was suspended for four months and placed on two years of probation for engaging in acts of moral turpitude and breaching his fiduciary duty to a nonclient.
     
      In July 1996 Dale was hired to represent 25 residents in a civil case after their apartment building was set on fire by an arsonist. The fire resulted in one death and several injuries. In July 1996 the arsonist was arrested and confessed to setting the fire. He was convicted of 13 counts of arson.
     
      While the arsonist was in prison and over the objections of his attorney, Dale befriended the arsonist in the hope that his declaration might be used in the civil trial. Dale obtained the defendant's declaration and filed it with the court in October 1999. The prisoner's attorney demanded that Dale withdraw the declaration, but Dale refused to do so. In January 2000 an attorney was appointed as the defendant's appellate counsel. In February 2000 the civil case settled for $400,000. Dale never spoke or communicated with the defendant after settlement of the civil case. In May 2000 the defendant filed a complaint against Dale with the State Bar. In April 2002 a notice of disciplinary charges was filed against Dale alleging specific acts of misconduct.
     
      The Review Department concluded that Dale engaged in multiple acts of wrongdoing and that he breached his fiduciary duty to a nonclient. The department concluded that Dale did not violate the rule prohibiting an attorney from communicating with a represented party because the rule was ambiguous in this situation. Dale's motion for rehearing was denied on February 22.
     
      In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that harmed the administration of justice. Dale continued to communicate with the defendant over the objections of the defendant's attorney. In addition, he demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct. In mitigation, Dale had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1994. In the State Bar Court trial, seven witnesses testified to Dale's good character.
     
      The order took effect February 3.
     
      Michael Dell'Osso, State Bar # 103439, Tracy (January 20). Dell'Osso, 51, was suspended for six months and placed on two years of probation for failure to communicate by failing to respond to client inquiries, and engaging in the unauthorized practice of law.
     
      In May 2003 Dell'Osso was hired to represent a client in a marital dissolution. Between January and May 2004 the client made several attempts to contact Dell'Osso by telephone and by letter, but Dell'Osso failed to respond to the client. In June 2004 the client received an invoice from Dell'Osso showing the client owed $1,865 for legal services. The next day, the client responded to the invoice by asking Dell'Osso about the status of the case. Dell'Osso failed to respond to the client's status request.
     
      In aggravation, Dell'Osso had a record of prior discipline. In mitigation, Dell'Osso cooperated with the State Bar by agreeing to the imposition of discipline without requiring a hearing.
     
      The order took effect February 19.
       
      R. S. Dervaes Jr., a.k.a. R. S. Dervais II, State Bar # 202133, San Francisco (January 27). Dervaes, 36, had his previously ordered probation revoked, the previously ordered stay of suspension lifted, and a new order issued in which he was suspended for three years and until he has shown proof of his rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and ability in the law. Dervaes was given credit toward the period of actual suspension for the involuntary inactive enrollment, which began on October 22, 2005. He was found culpable of failure to comply with conditions to a previous discipline.
     
      In June 2002 Dervaes was suspended for two years and placed on five years of probation and until he had shown proof of his rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and ability in the law. He was ordered to make restitution to three clients totaling $23,000. Dervaes was disciplined for failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to communicate, improper withdrawal from representation, engaging in acts of moral turpitude, failure to obey and comply with the laws of California, failure to comply with a court order, failure to refund unearned fees, failure to maintain a current address with the State Bar, and failure to cooperate with a bar investigation.
     
      Conditions to the discipline required Dervaes to perform specific acts, but he failed to comply with the imposed conditions by failing to submit quarterly probation reports for April and July 2005, failing to submit mental health reports for July 2005, failing to submit reports from a certified public accountant for April and July 2005, failing to submit proof of attending monthly meetings of the Other Bar or another twelve-step program, failing to provide proof of compliance with restitution conditions for April and July 2005, and failing to promptly respond to inquiries from the bar's Office of Probation.
     
      In aggravation, Dervaes had a record of prior discipline, the underlying matter. By failing to comply with conditions to the previous discipline, he demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct.
     
      The order took effect February 26.
     
      Kelechi C. Emeziem, State Bar # 159652, Emeryville (January 25). Emeziem, 41, was suspended for 18 months and until he makes restitution of $38,830 to three clients. He also was placed on three years of probation. He was disciplined after being found culpable of misconduct in five client matters for failure to maintain client funds in trust, failure to promptly pay out funds on behalf of a client, failure to perform legal services with competence, and aiding others in the unauthorized practice of law. The State Bar Court found that Emeziem negligently or recklessly abdicated his responsibility to his law office support staff by failing to oversee any of his nonattorney employees' activities. He allowed the nonattorney employees to advise prospective clients without supervision, allowed them to collect and distribute client funds, allowed them to execute leases for his San Jose office, and allowed them to place advertisements in Vietnamese-language newspapers using Emeziem's name and contact information. By allowing his nonattorney employees to engage in those activities, he aided them in the unauthorized practice of law.
     
      In aggravation, Emeziem had a record of prior discipline. Also, in the current matter, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused significant harm to clients. In mitigation, Emeziem demonstrated remorse for his wrongdoing.
     
      The order took effect February 24.
     
      Thomas G. Hrouda, State Bar # 193984, Moreno Valley (January 20). Hrouda, 34, was suspended for 60 days and placed on two years of probation. He will remain suspended until he makes restitution of $4,123 to three clients. He was disciplined for misconduct in seven client matters for failure to return all client papers, failure to perform legal services with competence, improper withdrawal from representation, failure to communicate, and failure to return unearned fees.
     
      In aggravation, the misconduct harmed Hrouda's clients. In mitigation, Hrouda had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1998. Also, at the time of his misconduct, Hrouda was suffering from exhaustion and depression.
     
      The order took effect February 19.
     
      William Jarblum, State Bar # 190424, Beverly Hills (February 1). Jarblum, 60, was suspended for two years and until he has shown proof of his rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and ability in the law. He was also placed on three years of probation. He was disciplined for failure to promptly pay out funds to a client and failure to maintain client funds in trust.
     
      In aggravation, the misconduct involved dishonesty and violations of the client trust account, all of which harmed the client. In mitigation, Jarblum cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings. In July 2005 he paid $50,000 toward the $150,000 judgment that was entered against him. Also, during the period of misconduct, Jarblum suffered emotional and financial difficulties.
     
      The order took effect March 3.
     
      Mark E. Montpas, State Bar # 93365, San Pedro (January 20). Montpas, 52, was suspended for 60 days and placed on two years of probation for violating Penal Code section 484(a), theft of property, a misdemeanor involving an act of moral turpitude, dishonesty, or corruption.
     
      In September 2000 Montpas was appointed by the court to represent a criminal defendant. In June 2001 he submitted a declaration stating he had interviewed the client on several occasions at the county facilities, but he could not substantiate the interviews. Based on his declaration, the county paid Montpas $1,920. In December 2004 he pleaded nolo contendere to one count of violating Penal Code section 484(a). He was placed on one year of summary probation and was ordered to pay a $100 fine, make restitution of $1,920 to the county, pay a $200 fine and penalty assessment, and complete 25 hours of community service, and he agreed to abstain from the practice of law from December 2004 through June 2005. In March 2005 the State Bar Court did not impose an interim suspension because Montpas agreed to abstain from law practice.
     
      In aggravation, the misconduct was surrounded by bad faith, dishonesty, concealment, and overreaching by submitting a false declaration. The misconduct also harmed the administration of justice because Montpas was appointed by the superior court to represent a criminal defendant. In mitigation, Montpas had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1980. He cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings. He also completed his 25 hours of community service and abstained from practicing law from December 2004 to June 2005.
     
      The order took effect February 19.
       
      Robert M. Nusbaum, State Bar # 149672, Lancaster (December 28). Nusbaum, 43, was suspended for two years and until he provides proof of his rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and ability in the law. He also was placed on five years of probation. Nusbaum was found culpable of misconduct in four client matters by failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to return unearned fees, failure to promptly return funds belonging to clients, and failure to communicate.
     
      In aggravation, Nusbaum had a record of prior discipline. In mitigation, in 2004 Nusbaum experienced family problems that took up much of his time, and he was unable to concentrate on his law practice.
     
      The order took effect January 27.
       
      Joseph C. Raineri, State Bar # 136192, Los Gatos (December 28). Raineri, 41, was suspended for 90 days and until he makes restitution of $3,900 to two clients and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. He was disciplined for failure to return a client file, failure to return unearned fees, failure to perform legal services with competence, failure to communicate, and failure to cooperate with three State Bar investigations.
     
      In March 2003 Raineri was given an initial payment of $3,500 to represent a client in a division of assets with the client's former domestic partner. Between March and July 2003 the client left numerous messages for Raineri, but Raineri failed to respond to the client's requests for information about the case. In July 2003 the client hired a new attorney, who immediately wrote to Raineri requesting an accounting and return of the client's file. Raineri failed to respond to the attorney's letter. In September 2003 the new attorney sent another letter to Raineri requesting an accounting and return of the $3,500 advance fee. Raineri failed to respond to the letter.
     
      On two dates in June 2004 a State Bar investigator wrote to Raineri requesting a written response to allegations of misconduct filed against him by the client's new attorney. Raineri failed to respond to the investigator's letters.
     
      In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused significant harm to clients. Also, Raineri failed to cooperate with the State Bar prior to entry of his default in the disciplinary proceedings. In mitigation, Raineri had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1988.
     
      The order took effect January 27.
       
      Lawrence G. Smith, State Bar # 83901, Santa Barbara (December 28). Smith, 59, was suspended for one year and until the State Bar Court grants a motion terminating the suspension. He was disciplined for failure to communicate, failure to return client papers and property, failure to perform legal services with competence, engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, and failure to cooperate with three State Bar investigations.
     
      In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused significant harm to Smith's clients. He demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct, and he failed to cooperate with the State Bar investigation and proceedings. In mitigation, Smith had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1978.
     
      The order took effect January 27.
     
      Eric Tarankow, State Bar # 101427, Los Angeles (February 3). Tarankow, 62, was suspended for three years and placed on five years of probation for failure to comply with conditions to a previous discipline. He was ordered to make restitution of $4,490, plus interest, to four clients. He also was given credit toward the period of actual suspension for the involuntary inactive enrollment, which began on November 28, 2005.
     
      In aggravation, Tarankow had a record of prior discipline. In the current matter, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. He failed to fully comply with imposed conditions to his probation after being reminded to do so by the probation office. He also demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his misconduct.
     
      The order took effect March 5.
     
      Thomas L. Upholt, State Bar # 67868, Sacramento (January 20). Upholt, 62, was suspended for 30 days and placed on two years of probation for failure to perform legal services with competence, improper withdrawal from representation, engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, failure to maintain a current address with the State Bar, and failure to cooperate with a bar investigation.
     
      In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing that caused significant harm to a client. In mitigation, Upholt had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1975. He also cooperated with the bar during its investigation and proceedings.
     
      The order took effect February 19.
     
      Steven L. Wilson, State Bar # 102944, Manhattan Beach (February 10). Wilson, 52, was suspended for 60 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.
     
      By stipulation, Wilson received a private reproval for failure to file a substitution of attorney or a motion to withdraw as attorney of record in a civil matter. Conditions to the discipline required Wilson to perform specific acts, but he failed to comply with the imposed conditions by failing to submit a quarterly probation report for January 2005 and failing to submit the final report, which was due in May 2005.
     
      In aggravation, Wilson had a record of prior discipline, the underlying matter. Also, he failed to participate in the disciplinary proceedings before entry of his default.
     
      The order took effect March 12.
     
      INTERIM SUSPENSION
      Richard W. Hamlin, State Bar # 122725, Placerville (January 24). Hamlin, 45, was convicted of violating Penal Code section 206, torture, and section 422, threatening to commit a crime to cause bodily harm or death, both felonies. The interim suspension will remain in effect until further order by the State Bar Court.
     
      The order took effect February 28.
     
      Ronald C. Kline, State Bar # 58903, Irvine (February 1). Kline, 65, was placed on interim suspension after his conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. section 2252A(a)(5)(B), possession of child pornography. The interim suspension will remain in effect until further order by the State Bar Court.
     
      The order took effect March 3.
       
      John C. Montano Jr., State Bar # 166382, San Clemente (February 7). Montano, 38, was placed on interim suspension following his conviction for violating Vehicle Code section 23152(b), driving under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of .08 percent or higher. The interim suspension will remain in effect until further order by the State Bar Court.
     
      The order took effect March 7.
     
      PROBATION
      Federico Acosta, State Bar # 158635, Tustin (January 20). Acosta, 53, was placed on two years of probation for engaging in the unauthorized practice of law and failing to properly supervise an employee.
     
      In aggravation, Acosta made six court appearances while he was not entitled to practice law and failed to inform the court of his status. His appearances during that time harmed the administration of justice. In mitigation, Acosta had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1992. Also, no clients were harmed by his misconduct. During the time of the misconduct, Acosta was under considerable emotional stress due to his wife's illness. He acknowledged his mistakes and is better prepared to manage his law practice while caring for his wife.
     
      The order took effect February 19.
     
      Joseph A. Bernal, State Bar # 119448, Pasadena (February 17). Bernal, 49, was placed on two years of probation for failure to comply with conditions to a public reproval.
     
      In October 2003 Bernal received a public reproval for failure to maintain client funds in trust and commingling. Conditions to the reproval required Bernal to take and pass the professional responsibility exam. He asked for and received an extension of time to take the exam. In November 2004 he took the exam but failed to pass it. In May 2005 he told the State Bar supervising trial counsel that he would take the exam again in August 2005, but he failed to do so. He registered to take the November 2005 exam. By failing to promptly take and pass the exam, Bernal failed to comply with the conditions to the public reproval.
     
      In aggravation, Bernal had a record of prior discipline, the underlying matter. He also demonstrated indifference toward rectification of his misconduct by failing to timely take and pass the exam, even after being given extra time to take the exam. In mitigation, he cooperated with the bar during its proceedings.
     
      The order took effect March 19.
     
      Bryant K. Calloway, State Bar # 140431, Mission Viejo (January 20). Calloway, 43, was placed on two years of probation for failure to cooperate with a State Bar investigation and failure to comply with a court order.
     
      In aggravation, Calloway had a record of prior discipline.
     
      The order took effect February 19.
     
      Larry S. Lapica, State Bar # 86303, Riverside (January 11). Lapica, 52, was placed on three years of probation after his conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol.
     
      In May 2003 Lapica was involved in an automobile accident in which occupants of the other vehicle were injured and taken to a hospital. After giving the other driver his license and insurance information, Lapica left the scene. After a short distance, he parked his car and began walking. The police found Lapica and determined he was under the influence of alcohol. A blood test revealed his blood alcohol level was 0.13 percent. In September 2003 Lapica pleaded guilty and was convicted of violating Vehicle Code section 23152(b), driving under the influence with a blood alcohol level greater than .08 percent. He was placed on four years of probation, was ordered to serve 90 days in jail, had his driving privileges restricted for 18 months, and was ordered to attend and complete a second-offender alcohol program.
     
      In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, Lapica had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1979. He cooperated with the bar during its investigation and proceedings. Also, at the time of his misconduct, Lapica suffered from extreme emotional difficulties.
     
      The order took effect February 10.
     
      David M. Robinson, State Bar # 175913, Los Angeles (January 20). Robinson, 38, was placed on two years of probation for failure to maintain client funds in trust and failure to promptly release client funds.
     
      In aggravation, Robinson had a record of prior discipline. In mitigation, he cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings.
     
      The order took effect February 19.
     
      Lawrence E. Sargent, State Bar # 134604, Monterey Park (Fed. 17). Sargent, 59, was placed on two years of probation for failure to comply with conditions to a private reproval.
     
      In April 2005 Sargent received a private reproval for engaging in a professional association with a resigned attorney. Conditions to the reproval required Sargent to file quarterly probation reports and complete six hours of continuing legal education courses in legal ethics. Sargent failed to file the probation reports due for October 2004, January 2005, and April 2005, and he failed to provide proof of completion of six hours of legal ethics.
     
      In aggravation, Sargent had a record of prior discipline, the underlying matter. Also, in the current discipline, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, Sargent cooperated with the State Bar during its proceedings.
     
      The order took effect March 19.
     
      Harry R. Schultz, State Bar # 151946, Los Angeles (January 25). Schultz, 51, was placed on three years of probation after his conviction for violating Penal Code sections 71 and 653m(a).
     
      Beginning in May 2004 Schultz left a series of threatening and abusive telephone messages on the answering machine of a person who worked as counsel for the Department of Real Estate, where Schultz had an application for a real estate broker's license pending. The messages concerned the delay Schultz was experiencing in receiving his license.
     
      In January 2005 Schultz pleaded nolo contendere to violating Penal Code section 71, threatening a public employee, and section 653m(a), using a telephone or other electronic device with intent to annoy. The court placed Schultz on 36 months of summary probation, ordered him to pay fines and assessments, and required him to perform 24 days of Caltrans service. It also ordered him not to possess dangerous or deadly weapons; not to annoy, harass, molest, or threaten anyone involved in the case; and not to use force or violence against anyone.
     
      In aggravation, Schultz had a record of prior discipline. In mitigation, he cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings. Also, at the time of his most recent misconduct, Schultz suffered extreme emotional difficulties that were responsible for the misconduct.
     
      The order took effect February 24.
     
      Janis L. Turner, State Bar # 79217, San Diego (February 17). Turner, 59, was placed on two years of probation for failure to comply with conditions to a previous order of discipline.
     
      In May 2004 Turner was placed on one year of probation for failure to perform legal services with competence and failure to preserve the secrets of her clients. Conditions to the discipline required Turner to submit quarterly probation reports and to attend and pass State Bar ethics school. She failed to timely file the probation report for April 2005, failed to file a final report that was due in May 2005, and failed to attend ethics school.
     
      In aggravation, Turner had a record of prior discipline, the underlying matter.
     
      The order took effect March 19.
     

---