California Bar Journal
OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA - JUNE 2000
spacer.gif (810 bytes)

DISCIPLINE

spacer.gif (810 bytes)
CAUTION!
Nearly 169,450 attorneys are eligible to practice law in California. Many attorneys share the same names. All discipline reports are taken from State Bar Court documents and should be read carefully for names, ages, addresses and bar numbers.
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
DISBARMENTS

WILLIAM EDGAR DAVIS III [#101641], 46, of Los Angeles was disbarred Jan. 12, 2000. He was ordered to comply with rule 955 of the California Rules of Court.

In a default proceeding, the State Bar Court found that Davis intentionally failed to perform legal services competently in two matters and twice failed to communicate with clients.

The court recommended disbarment because of the “overwhelming predominance of aggravating circumstances.”

In the first matter, a client paid Davis $650 to file a bankruptcy matter. After a month, he stopped communicating with her and she was unable to reach him despite at least 25 phone calls.

His paralegal prepared the bankruptcy petition, which the client filed on her own. Davis never paid the paralegal or reviewed her work; she placed 26 calls to him but he never responded.

Davis never prepared a bankruptcy petition for another client, who had paid him $1,000. He did not return phone calls or refund the fee.

According to the bar court, Davis threatened both clients with a lawsuit for slander. The threat to the first client amounted to moral turpitude because Davis improperly attempted to dissuade the ex-client from pursuing her complaint to the bar. He did not ask the second client to withdraw his complaint.

Davis was disciplined twice previously. In 1993, he was suspended for abandoning three criminal clients, disobeying four court orders to appear at hearings, and abandoning a client in a personal injury matter.

In 1999, the bar court found that Davis failed to maintain in trust $2,299 of a client’s funds, and delayed 19 months before paying a medical lien.

JAMES ALBERT MOSER [#159600], 54, of Fairfax was disbarred Jan. 16, 2000. He was ordered to comply with rule 955.

Moser was disbarred in a default proceeding for failure to comply with a 1998 rule 955 requirement; he did not submit to the Supreme Court an affidavit stating that he had notified all pertinent parties of his suspension from practice.

The earlier discipline was imposed as a result of Moser’s repeated writing of personal checks against his client trust account. Many of the checks were returned for insufficient funds.

The misconduct began less than three years after Moser was admitted to practice.

DAVID RICHARD RANCOURT [#161461], 34, of Providence, R.I., was disbarred Feb. 12, 2000, and was ordered to comply with rule 955.

Rancourt did not comply with a 1998 rule 955 requirement by not filing the required affidavit with the Supreme Court.

The earlier discipline was imposed for Rancourt’s failure to comply with the conditions of a public reproval and for failing to properly represent a client.

The reproval was based on misconduct affecting an incarcerated client, with whom Rancourt did not communicate and for whom he failed to perform legal services.

Rancourt’s default was entered when he failed to participate in the disbarment proceeding.

LINDA LENORE WILGUS [#112204], 56, of Danville was disbarred Feb. 12, 2000, and was ordered to comply with rule 955.

Wilgus did not file with the Supreme Court the rule 955 affidavit required by a 1998 disciplinary order. Her disbarment was recommended in a default hearing.

The earlier discipline involved three client matters in which Wilgus failed to perform legal services competently, respond to client inquiries or communicate with a client. She also bounced several checks written against her client trust account, and did not cooperate with the bar’s investigation of her conduct.

SUSPENSIONS/PROBATION

KEVIN CHRISTOPHER McDONOUGH [#99944], 45, of Clinton, Conn., was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on two years of probation with an actual 60-day suspension, and was ordered to prove his rehabilitation and take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect Dec. 19, 1999, and he returned to active status Feb. 17, 2000.

McDonough stipulated to three counts of misconduct.

He did not maintain adequate trust account records, used his trust account for personal and business purposes unrelated to any client matter, and wrote several checks against insufficient funds.

In mitigation, McDonough has no record of prior discipline, no clients were harmed and he was suffering from alcoholism.

THOMAS H. MAHONEY [#44287], 67, of Sacramento was suspended for one year, stayed, and placed on two years of probation. The order took effect Dec. 19, 1999.

Mahoney failed to comply with conditions attached to a 1998 public reproval: he did not provide proof of participation in a fee arbitration, provided no proof that he had made any payment to a former client, and did not attend ethics school or file quarterly probation reports.

The public reproval was the result of Mahoney’s failure to comply with conditions of an agreement in lieu of discipline he reached with the State Bar in 1997.

The underlying conduct involved a failure to return advanced fees after Mahoney and a client ended their relationship.

In mitigation, Mahoney suffered marital and family difficulties, has had a series of hospitalizations, including three surgeries, and has significantly reduced his caseload.

CAROL LYNN MARTIN [#157177], 32, of San Jose was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on three years of probation with a one-year actual suspension and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. Credit towards the actual suspension will be given for an interim suspension which began Dec. 5, 1998. If the period of actual suspension exceeds two years, she must prove her rehabilitation. The order took effect Dec. 19, 1999.

Martin pleaded no contest in 1998 to one count of first degree burglary. She had acquired the key to a friend’s home and took clothing, jewelry and other personal items.

The victim had been both friendly and abusive over the years; her behavior reinforced abusive behavior Martin has suffered for much of her life.

In mitigation, Martin has undergone therapy to deal with past abuse which led to a psychological disorder. Her therapist reported that the disorder was related to Martin’s actions in the burglary matter.

Martin cooperated with the investigation and presented significant testimony as to her good character.

JOSE ANGEL RODRIGUEZ [#62551], 51, of El Monte was suspended for two years, stayed, and placed on probation for three years. The order took effect Dec. 19, 1999.

Rodriguez violated the terms of a 1995 probation by failing to file quarterly reports or certificates from a certified public accountant that he is properly maintaining his client trust account.

He had stipulated to trust account violations, failure to perform legal services competently, failure to communicate with clients and the unauthorized practice of law.

At the time of Rodriguez’ misconduct, he was a municipal court commissioner.

In mitigation, Rodriguez was depressed due to the humiliation caused by the discipline order, had family problems, suffered from alcoholism and was suspended from his job because of the discipline. He submitted letters attesting to his good character, attends AA meetings, has a long record of pro bono activities and presides over a successful drug court.

MALIK ALI MUHAMMAD [#74824], 54, of Oakland was suspended for 30 days. The order took effect Dec. 19, 1999.

Muhammad failed to comply with conditions attached to a public reproval and an agreement in lieu of discipline: he did not attend ethics school or take the professional responsibility exam.

The discipline resulted from a contempt conviction.

Muhammad, a devout Muslim and strong supporter of the black community, had intentionally failed to appear in court twice as a protest of the verdict in the Rodney King beating case. He served jail time for the conviction, which eventually led to discipline by the State Bar. The bar court found that he violated a court order and showed disrespect to a court.

Muhammad intentionally failed to comply with the disciplinary orders as a protest against what he perceives as a racist system.

LUIS RENE VALDEZ [#153865], 38, of Santa Ana was suspended for 60 days, stayed, placed on one year of probation and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect Dec. 19, 1999.

Valdez failed to comply with conditions attached to a 1997 public reproval: he has not filed six quarterly probation reports, taken the MPRE, attended ethics school or completed six hours of instruction in law office management.

The underlying misconduct to which he stipulated involved failure to respond to client inquiries and keep them informed about developments in their matters, improperly withdrawing from representation without protecting a cli-ent’s interests, and failure to cooperate with the bar’s investigation.

In mitigation, he was suffering from financial stress at the time of the misconduct, and no clients were harmed by his failure to comply with the probation conditions.

The probation of JEFFREY JOHN WIEBE [#147834], 37, of Alameda was extended for one year, beginning Dec. 19, 1999.

Wiebe failed to comply with probation conditions attached to 1998 discipline order: he filed two quarterly reports late and completed ethics school and trust accounting school after the deadlines.

In mitigation, Wiebe is enrolled in a residential substance abuse program, learning strategies to cope with the stress of working as a sole practitioner.

The underlying misconduct involved failure to avoid adverse interests with a client, maintain client funds in a trust account, or pay out client funds promptly.

MARK J. FLANNICK [#169998], 36, of Los Angeles was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on two years of probation with an actual 30-day suspension, and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect Dec. 31, 1999.

Flannick worked as an “attorney-advisor” for the federal government, in a job which requires him to be a member of the bar in good standing even though he does not practice law.

He was suspended in 1997 for nonpayment of bar dues, but failed to notify his employer of the suspension and held himself out as entitled to practice.

In mitigation, no one was harmed by Flannick’s conduct and he cooperated with the bar’s investigation.

MATTHEW CHARLES LONG [#55857], 67, of Los Angeles was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on two years of probation and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect Dec. 31, 1999.

Long violated the terms of a 1997 disciplinary probation by failing to submit four quarterly reports, attend six hours of MCLE courses on law office management or take the professional responsibility exam.

The 1997 order resulted from Long’s failure to comply with the terms of a 1995 public reproval requiring him to take the MPRE.

DONETIA R. MESHACK [#118044], 42, of Los Angeles was suspended for 90 days and until she makes restitution and she was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 955. If the suspension exceeds two years, she must prove her rehabilitation. The order took effect Dec. 31, 1999.

In a default proceeding, the State Bar Court found that Meshack violated the terms of a 1998 public reproval by failing to submit five quarterly reports, proof of membership in the law practice management section or proof of completion of the professional responsibility exam, and she had not made restitution to a client.

It is her fourth disciplinary proceeding and the third involving probation violations.

Meshack was privately reproved in 1995 for failing to perform legal services competently, return client papers and property or refund unearned fees.

In 1997, she was publicly reproved for failure to refund unearned fees, cooperate with a bar investigation, maintain a current address with the bar and for failing to comply with conditions attached to the private reproval. She had not provided proof of restitution, completed ethics school or taken the professional responsibility exam.

The following year, she was again publicly reproved for failing to file quarterly probation reports, prove her membership in the law practice management section or submit proof of restitution, all required in the 1997 order.

LINCOLN N. MINTZ [#37610], 58, of Oakland was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on three years of probation with a nine-month actual suspension and until he proves his rehabilitation, and was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 955. The order took effect Dec. 31, 1999.

Mintz stipulated to eight instances of failing to respond to State Bar inquiries about complaints filed against him by clients.

In one case, he was hired to represent a client in a pending fee arbitration proceeding, but after a couple of months of work, Mintz stopped communicating with his client. He stipulated to failure to respond to his client’s reasonable status inquiries and to improperly withdrawing from employment.

Mintz also stopped communicating with a client who was charged with two murders.

Mintz was disciplined in 1997 for failing to comply with the conditions of an earlier private reproval.

In the current case, he stipulated that he also failed to comply with the conditions of his 1997 probation by not filing quarterly reports or developing a law office management plan.

BRUCE STEVEN WEINER [#78533], 48, of Newport Beach was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on 18 months of probation with 120 days of actual suspension, and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year and comply with rule 955. The order took effect Dec. 31, 1999.

Weiner stipulated to misconduct in four matters.

In the first, he practiced law while suspended for failure to pay bar dues; he appeared in court or filed pleadings on four separate occasions as the attorney of record for the plaintiff in a civil matter. He then failed to cooperate with the bar’s investigation.

He represented another client in a personal injury matter and although the client terminated his services, he communicated with her in a way that constituted giving legal advice during the time he was suspended.

Weiner also was suspended in a 1997 disciplinary order, but did not comply with probation conditions: he failed to submit probation reports on time and completed ethics school after the required deadline.

That matter was the result of unauthorized practice, collecting an illegal or unconscionable fee and failure to promptly refund unearned fees.

In mitigation, Weiner mistakenly thought his discipline cases had been abated and his efforts to clarify the status of his cases were unsuccessful due to the partial shutdown of the bar’s discipline system in 1998.

He has done charitable work for a child abuse prevention organization.

BYRON WILLIE COOPER [#166578], 37, of Palo Alto was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on two years of probation with an actual 30-day suspension and was ordered to take the MPRE. The order took effect Jan. 5, 2000.

Cooper pleaded no contest in 1998 to three misdemeanors — knowingly dissuading a witness from giving testimony, prowling on the private property of another and disturbing the peace by fighting in a public place.

Although Cooper was placed on interim suspension by the bar in 1999, the suspension was later vacated and referred to the State Bar Court’s hearing department for a decision recommending the discipline to be imposed.

Cooper’s troubles began when he drove into a motel parking lot one night to eat some food he had purchased at a fast food outlet on his way home from work.

According to a stipulation he reached with the bar, he felt that as a black man, he was less likely to be questioned if he were on private property rather than on the street at 11 p.m.

Cooper stepped out of his car to see what was on the floor of an empty carport when a man in a truck drove up and accused him of looking in his window. When Cooper tried to leave, the truck driver blocked his car.

Cooper and the truck driver grappled over a cell phone, which Cooper grabbed and threw over a fence. Meanwhile, the truck moved and struck a parked car. The driver’s daughter and a neighbor emerged from the motel and began to fight with Cooper, who was knocked to the ground.

He was able to get up and drove away.

In mitigation, no victims or witnesses were injured and no client was involved. Cooper graduated from the West Point Military Academy and received the Army Commendation Medal after serving in the armed forces. He has a record of community service.

WILLIAM ROMAN GARDNER [#95186], 45, of San Francisco was suspended for three months, stayed, and placed on probation for one year and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect Jan. 5, 2000.

Gardner stipulated to misconduct in two matters.

In the first, he was hired to obtain an annulment of marriage after the client’s dissolution matter had been acted upon in court. When Gardner filed a petition for nullity,. he did not file a motion to set aside the judgment of dissolution.

After the opposing party filed a motion to quash, Gardner dismissed the motion for annulment with prejudice and did no further work on the case.

He stipulated that he failed to act competently.

In the other matter, Gardner was suspended from practice for a month in 1994 for nonpayment of bar dues. He practiced law during the course of the suspension.

In mitigation, he has no record of prior discipline, he cooperated with the bar’s investigation, and no harm was done to any clients.

DARRYL JEROME BILLUPS [#65216], 52, of Hayward was suspended for three years, stayed, placed on three years of probation with an actual 20-month suspension, and was ordered to take the MPRE. Credit toward the suspension will be given for an interim suspension which began Aug. 17, 1999. The order took effect Jan. 12, 1999.

Billups was convicted in 1997 of driving under the influence with four priors. He was found by a police officer in Berkeley slumped over his steering wheel with the engine of his car still running. His blood alcohol level was .22. At the time, he was driving on a suspended license.

Billups was placed on interim suspension by the State Bar Court in 1997, was ordered to comply with rule 955 of the California Rules of Court and filed the required affidavit stating that he had notified all pertinent parties of his suspension from practice.

He stipulated that during the interim suspension, he failed to notify a court, in which he made an appearance, of his suspension.

In mitigation, he has no record of prior discipline.

BRUCE ALLEN BROWN [#140111], 51, of Manhattan Beach was suspended for three years, stayed, placed on three years of probation with a nine-month actual suspension and until he makes restitution, and was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 955. If the actual suspension exceeds two years, Brown must prove his rehabilitation. The order took effect Jan. 12, 2000.

In 1993, Brown filed a complaint for slander and intentional infliction of emotional distress against another attorney in Los Angeles Superior Court. According to the State Bar Court, the plaintiffs were fictitious and the allegations in the complaint were untrue.

A court commissioner found that the matter was frivolous and that Brown acted in bad faith for the purpose of annoying the other attorney. Brown was ordered to pay the defendant in the suit sanctions totalling $11,315.75.

He then filed a second slander action against the same attorney and also named his former wife as a defendant. Again, the bar court said, the plaintiffs were fictitious and the allegations untrue. The case was dismissed.

The bar court found that by filing and prosecuting two frivolous suits, Brown sought to mislead the court, failed to pursue only actions that appear to be legal, and committed acts of moral turpitude.

BRUCE CLINTON HILL [#43427], 57, of Woodland Hills was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on two years of probation with an actual 60-day suspension, and was ordered to take the MPRE. The order took effect Jan. 12, 2000.

Hill was retained and paid $1,000 in 1989 to represent a client in a breach of contract matter and to procure an attorney in Kansas to handle an unrelated foreclosure proceeding in that state.

He did no work in the breach of contract matter, which was lost when the statute of limitations expired, and never hired counsel in Kansas. For seven years, he advised his client that he had filed the breach of contract complaint and provided a false case number to the client’s bankruptcy attorney.

Hill stipulated that he failed to perform legal services for his client and that he committed acts of moral turpitude by making false representations.

He has no record of discipline since his 1969 admission to the bar.

CHARLES HAROLD KAVALARIS [#46853], 56, of San Jose was suspended for three years, stayed, placed on four years of probation with a one-year actual suspension and was ordered to comply with rule 955. The order took effect Feb. 21, 2000.

Kavalaris engaged in fee-splitting with nonlawyers in a kickback scheme. From 1985 until 1991, Kavalaris and his law partner paid more than $130,000 to the secretary-treasurer of the San Jose Teamsters Union for referrals of personal injury clients. From 1987 to 1991, they paid another $150,000-plus to other nonlawyers in exchange for referrals.

Although Kavalaris said the statute of limitations had run on the misconduct, the State Bar Court disagreed. Under rule 51 of the Rules of Procedure of the State Bar, the statute of limitations applies only to investigations initiated because of a complaint by an individual. The investigation of Kavalaris was initiated by a bar attorney, who read about the kickback scheme in the newspaper in 1995.

The court found that Kavalaris’ actions also involved moral turpitude.

He also wrote two checks against insufficient funds in his client trust account and commingled personal and client funds in the account.

Kavalaris was disciplined in 1997 for failing to communicate with a client or pay and report sanctions, for improperly withdrawing from a case and for a second DUI conviction. When he violated his probation by failing to file a probation report on time, he was suspended for 60 days. He practiced law while suspended, appearing at two arbitration hearings, making a court appearance and finalizing settlement of a case.

The bar court said it found the trust account violations and Kavalaris’ unauthorized law practice more troubling than the earlier kickback scheme.

His actions “show a disregard for the orders of the Supreme Court and the review department of the State Bar Court,” wrote Judge Nancy Roberts Lonsdale. How-ever, she rejected the bar’s recommendation that Kavalaris be disbarred.

In mitigation, Kavalaris is an alcoholic (now sober), suffers from acute depression, has acted as a judge pro tem, and provides free legal advice to other members of Alcoholics Anonymous. The fee-splitting misconduct occurred from 1985 to 1991 and ceased eight years ago.

The probation of WILLIAM L. BRYAN JR. [#117084], 47, of Foothill Ranch was revoked, the previous stay of suspension was lifted, and he was given a new two-year suspension, stayed, and placed on two years of probation with a 60-day actual suspension. The order took effect Jan. 15, 2000.

Bryan was disciplined in 1998 for misconduct in three consolidated cases. His actions included failure to perform legal services competently, promptly return client papers or respond to client inquiries, improperly withdrawing from representation and false advertising.

He failed to comply with eight separate conditions of the 1998 probation, including submitting quarterly probation reports, attending ethics school, attending Narcotics Anonymous meetings and taking the professional responsibility examination.

In mitigation, the misconduct occurred at a time Bryan was suffering from severe emotional difficulties and had family problems. He and his wife were about to adopt a baby when the birth mother took the child back, an event which worsened Bryan’s manic depressive illness. In addition, he and his wife cared for his wife’s terminally ill parents at their home.

PETER JOHN DANIELS [#52310], 58, of Cupertino was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on three years of probation and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect Jan. 16, 2000.

Daniels pleaded no contest in 1998 to four misdemeanors: two counts of threatening to commit a crime resulting in death or great bodily harm, one count of infliction of corporal injury on a spouse, and one count of alcohol-related reckless driving.

His wife had accused him of twice threatening to kill her and of shaking her so hard that her neck was injured.

As part of his probation, he is required to attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings and to seek counseling.

He cooperated with the bar’s investigation.

MARVIN EMERY PARKER [#109164], 47, of Inglewood was suspended for 90 days and until the State Bar Court grants a motion to terminate the suspension. He was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 955. If the suspension exceeds two years, he must prove his rehabilitation. He also must comply with any probation requirements imposed as a condition for terminating his suspension. The order took effect Jan. 16, 2000.

Parker was publicly reproved in 1997 for allowing the statute of limitations to expire on his client’s personal injury matter, despite calls from his client.

He did not fulfill the conditions of his reproval — he failed to file quarterly probation reports, attend ethics school or take the MPRE.

The probation of THOMAS PATRICK FREYDL [#159567], 58, of Montebello was revoked, the previous stay of suspension was lifted, and he was suspended for six months with credit for a 45-day period of actual suspension and for a period of involuntary inactive enrollment that began Nov. 7, 1999. He was ordered to comply with rule 955. The order took effect Feb. 3, 2000.

Freydl was disciplined in 1998 but failed to file quarterly probation reports, a condition of his probation.

He had stipulated to five counts of misconduct in two client matters, including failing to return unearned fees or respond to client inquiries. He also entered into a loan agreement with a client without putting the terms of the loan into writing or advising the client to seek independent counsel.

The probation of MICHAEL BANCROFT LLOYD [#71708], 49, of Riverside was revoked, the stay of suspension lifted and he was ordered suspended for six months. He must comply with rule 955. The order took effect Feb. 3, 2000.

Lloyd did not submit three quarterly reports required by a 1998 discipline order. That misconduct involved Lloyd having his clients, without their informed written consent or authority, purchase a $125,000 annuity with Lloyd as beneficiary in order to secure his legal fees.

CHRISTINA M. ARNALL [#85869], 50, of Northridge was suspended for three years, stayed, placed on three years of probation with an actual two-year suspension, and was ordered to make restitution, prove her rehabilitation, take the MPRE and comply with rule 955. The order took effect Feb. 12, 2000.

According to a stipulation Arnall reached with the bar, she was retained to represent six people who had been trapped in an elevator. She settled the case for $20,000, which was deposited in her client trust account, but she never paid the clients and stopped communicating with them.

The clients employed new counsel who requested the return of the clients’ files three times. Arnall ignored the requests.

Although she reached a settlement agreement with the clients, Arnall paid only $2,000 of the $22,000 she owed.

She also commingled personal and client funds in her trust account, and wrote more than 30 checks against insufficient funds.

In mitigation, Arnall has no record of discipline since her 1979 admission to the bar, and she had financial difficulties and family problems at the time of the misconduct.

FRANK CATALLO [#55523], 61, of Palm Desert was suspended for one year, stayed, and was placed on probation for one year with a 45-day actual suspension. The order took effect Feb. 12, 2000.

Catallo stipulated to misconduct involving his client trust account.

He deposited settlement funds for a client and her two minor daughters, but allowed the balance in the trust account to fall below the required amount four times. He commingled personal and client funds in the account.

Catallo did not petition the court for a compromise of the daughters’ settlements, as required by the probate code, so their portion of the funds was not placed into an interest-bearing blocked account until they reached the age of 18. Catallo also took one-third of their settlement as attorney fees.

He stipulated that he failed to properly supervise his client trust account, commingled personal and client funds, and collected an illegal fee by taking one-third of the daughters’ settlement without a court order.

In mitigation, Catallo cooperated with the bar’s investigation, has no record of prior discipline, has a strong record of community service, and took immediate steps to rectify the problems with his trust account.

ARTHUR HOW FONG [#80048], 53, of Los Angeles was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on three years of probation with a 120-day actual suspension, and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year and comply with rule 955. The order took effect Feb. 12, 2000.

Fong stipulated that he failed to fulfill the requirements of an earlier discipline by not sumbitting an affidavit to the Supreme Court attesting that he had notified all clients and other pertinent parties of a 1998 suspension.

That misconduct involved commingling personal and client funds in his client trust account. Fong wrote 36 personal checks for more than $5,400 against the account.

In mitigation, no clients were harmed, Fong showed remorse and cooperated with the bar’s investigation, and at the time of the misconduct, he faced severe financial stress as well as physical disabilities.

BILL MARK MILESTONE [#160548], 41, of Santa Cruz was suspended for three years, stayed, placed on three years of probation with an actual one-year suspension, and was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 955. Credit towards the suspension will be given for an interim suspension which began Dec. 5, 1998. If the actual suspension exceeds two years, he must prove his rehabilitation. The order took effect Feb. 12, 2000.

Milestone pleaded no contest in 1998 to embezzlement, an offense involving moral turpitude.

He stipulated that he settled a client’s personal injury case for more than $31,000, paid the client and paid the liens against the settlement. He kept $10,000 as his fee.

Once he was informed the insurance company and the medical center had released their liens, he transferred more than $6,000 remaining in the trust account to his personal account.

In mitigation, Milestone believed once the client received her share of the settlement, the balance could be distributed to the attorneys. He did not believe he had done anything wrong.

The client received the entire amount of the settlement and paid no fees to Milestone or a previous attorney.

Milestone also cooperated with the bar’s investigation and submitted numerous letters attesting to his good character and reputation.

RESIGNATIONS/CHARGES PENDING

GREGORY LYLE PEDLAR [#92987], 46, of Novato (Dec. 12, 1999)

JOHN CHADWICK WEAVER [#86709], 77, of Santa Monica (Dec. 12, 1999)

KELLY MARTIN WILSON [#153577], 48, of Martinez (Dec. 12, 1999)

CYRUS ALAN COX [#146017], 44, of Longwood, Fla. (Dec. 19, 1999)

RAMIN SANJAR [#143557], 39, of Glendale (Jan. 1, 2000)

KEVIN FOSTER SCHONEMAN [#90889], 46, of Sacramento (Jan. 12, 2000)

DANIEL THOMAS DONNELLY [#64029], 51, of Hemet (Feb. 12, 2000)

GAIL ANN EASTON [#79988], 48, of San Jose (Feb. 12, 2000)

JOHN B. EVANS [#61068], 55, of San Francisco (Feb. 12, 2000)

EKITA L. MITCHELL [#139685], 46, of Silver Springs, Md. (Feb. 12, 2000)

TERRENCE LEE MEYER [#129447], 54, of Fair Oaks (Feb. 12, 2000)