California Bar Journal
OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA - JULY 2001
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
spacer.gif (810 bytes)

California Bar Journal

The State Bar of California


REGULARS

spacer.gif (810 bytes)
Front Page - July 2001
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
News / News Briefs
Two-year fee bill goes to governor
Janet Reno, low-cost MCLE highlight Annual Meeting
Stanley Mosk dies at 88
State Bar wins ABA's Harrison Tweed Award for pro bono, legal access, IOLTA efforts
Foundation will accept grant applications beginning July 16
Winnebago of justice serves those on the road less traveled
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
Trials Digest
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
Legal Tech - Matter management is not just for litigators
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
Opinion
From the President - Public members bring fresh views
Holding judges accountable
Letters to the Editor
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
MCLE Self-Study
Alcohol and the workplace
Self-Assessment Test
MCLE Calendar of Events
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
Ethics update...
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
You Need to Know
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
Public Comment
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
Discipline
Ethics Byte - Level field or a judicial practical joke?
Former DA disbarred for drunken-driving coverup
Attorney Discipline

DISCIPLINE

spacer.gif (810 bytes)
CAUTION!
More than 175,000 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

STUART K. LESANSKY [#120826], 49, of Pasadena was summarily disbarred March 31, 2001, following a conviction of attempting a lewd act on a child.

Lesansky, a member of the Century City Bar Association's board of governors from1990 to 1997, took his case to the California Supreme Court, where he argued that the summary disbarment statute applies only if the underlying offense demonstrates unfitness to practice. The court rejected his arguments, ruling that conviction for a felony that involves moral turpitude is grounds for automatic disbarment.

Lesansky met a woman in an online chat room who used the screen name "Lisabruce" and described herself as a 14-year-old who looked like she was 17. But Lisabruce was in fact 20-year-old Jennifer Hersey, who was working on a television story about sex on the internet.

After several conversations, some with sexual overtones, Lesansky made arrangements to have lunch with Hersey in San Diego. When they met, it became apparent to Lesansky that Hersey was an adult, according to his petition to the Supreme Court. They continued their online communication and met a second time in Los Angeles.

There was no physical contact or sexual activity at either meeting, but after the Los Angeles meeting, Lesansky was arrested. He pleaded no contest in January 1998 to one count of attempting a lewd act on a child, and was sentenced to one year of probation.

Lesansky had been on interim suspension since April 1998.

CRISTETA S. PAGUIRIGAN, [#115992], 41, of Los Angeles was summarily disbarred March 31, 2001, following a felony forgery conviction.

Her case also went to the Supreme Court, where she argued that summary disbarment could be imposed only after a hearing on the facts surrounding her conviction. She also contended that automatic disbarment was inappropriate because it is not always imposed on attorneys convicted of similar offenses. The court rejected both arguments.

While representing a client in a 1996 civil matter, Paguirigan forged the signature of a witness on two declarations and filed the documents in superior court. She was charged with two counts of knowingly introducing a forged document into evidence. Paguirigan pleaded no contest to one count of forgery, receiving a three-year suspended sentence in criminal court. 

The State Bar Court placed Paguirigan on interim suspension in February 1998, then recommended summary disbarment.

Paguirigan said she was under intense pressure representing clients in a major employment discrimination case when she forged the signature after retyping declarations that had original signatures. She said she later learned the witness was upset about the forgery of her name.

RICHARD GOMEZ-H [#79475], 50, of South Pasadena was disbarred April 6, 2001, and ordered to comply with rule 955 of the California Rules of Court.

In a default proceeding, the State Bar Court found that Gomez-H, a sole practitioner, misappropriated settlement and insurance claim funds for seven clients by failing to deposit checks in client trust accounts. Instead, checks were placed in a frequently overdrawn office account or deposited elsewhere for cashing. Some clients received their settlement checks; others received no money. Several of the clients' medical liens went unpaid.

In 1996, Gomez-H gave control of his practice to his office administrator, a non-attorney, and allowed the administrator to handle pending client matters. The misappropriation of funds occurred while the practice was in the administrator's unsupervised control.

Two clients Gomez-H represented in a civil action complained to the State Bar after Gomez-H failed to disburse their settlement checks. The bar court found that the administrator, acting on behalf of Gomez-H, asked the clients to withdraw their complaint in exchange for their shares of the settlement. He then disbursed funds to the clients, less attorney's fees.

In recommending disbarment, Judge Carlos Velarde cited Gomez-H's "pattern of misconduct" and expressed concern that the attorney had given control of his law practice to a lay person.

In mitigation, Gomez-H had practiced law for 18 years with no record of discipline. But Judge Velarde noted the attorney had been inactive since September 1999 for failing to respond to the bar's investigation.

IRIS LYNNE JOHNSON-BRIGHT [#91735], 49, of Culver City was disbarred April 6, 2001, and ordered to comply with rule 955.

In a default proceeding, the State Bar Court found Johnson-Bright wilfully failed to comply with rule 955 because she did not file an affidavit showing her compliance. In 1998, she was given a stayed suspension, placed on probation for three years and was actually suspended for nine months and ordered to make restitution.

That discipline was ordered after the State Bar Court found she failed to perform legal services and return legal fees in two client matters.

She also was disciplined in 1992 for negotiating a settlement for a client without authorization, endorsing a settlement draft without the client's knowledge and misappropriating the proceeds.

LAURA LUCIANA SANTOS [#150378], 57, of Los Angeles was disbarred April 13, 2001, and ordered to comply with rule 955.

Disbarment was recommended after Santos failed to comply with rule 955 following a 2000 disciplinary matter.

At that time, she received probation and a two-year suspension for misconduct in seven consolidated cases including: failure to pay and misappropriation of client funds, failure to perform legal services competently, communicate with clients, cooperate with the bar's investigation, pay or report sanctions or comply with probation conditions from an earlier discipline. She also committed an act of moral turpitude.

Santos was disciplined in 1996 for failure to properly maintain client funds, refund an unearned fee, perform legal services competently or respond to client inquiries.

SUSPENSION/PROBATION

JEFFREY J. WIEBE [#147834], 38, of Hillsborough, N.C., was suspended for three years, stayed, placed on four years of probation for an actual two-year suspension and was ordered to prove his rehabilitation and take the MPRE. The order took effect March 22, 2001.

Wiebe represented the plaintiff in a personal injury matter. When the defendant died, he notified his client he would make a claim against the defendant's estate. Six months later, without telling his client, he dismissed the lawsuit but noted that he intended to pursue the matter as a creditor.

He then missed the statutory deadline for filing a complete claim, but did not tell the client about his neglect.

Wiebe was convicted of five misdemeanors in Alameda County, including a DUI, driving with a suspended license, leaving the scene of an accident and resisting peace officers. He stipulated that his conduct involved moral turpitude.

He was placed on interim suspension as a result of the convictions, but failed to comply with a rule 955 order that he file with the Supreme Court an affidavit stating that he had notified his clients and other pertinent parties of his suspension from practice.

Wiebe also was disciplined in 1999 but did not comply with probation conditions - he failed to submit two quarterly probation reports, an office organization plan or proof of attendance at eight anti-substance abuse meetings. That discipline extended his probation from a 1995 order which resulted from representing adverse interests and failing to deposit client funds in a trust account or promptly pay out client funds.

THOMAS GLEN HAHN [#55041], 54, of Newport Beach was suspended for three years, stayed, placed on three years of probation with an actual nine month suspension, and was ordered to prove his rehabilitation, take the MPRE within one year and comply with rule 955. The order took effect March 28, 2001.

Hahn stipulated that he failed to comply with rule 955 by filing a required affidavit late. He also did not complete ethics school. Both requirements were part of a 1999 disciplinary order imposed for Hahn's failure to deposit client funds in a trust account, keep complete records of client funds, promptly pay out client funds or return client phone calls, and for committing acts of moral turpitude.

In mitigation, a physician submitted a report that Hahn's failure to file the affidavit on time may have been the result of his significant depression. He also demonstrated remorse and cooperated with the bar's investigation.

GREGORY CHARLES HORN [#66234], 53, of Calabasas was suspended for five years, stayed, actually suspended for three years and until he makes restitution, proves his rehabilitation and the State Bar Court grants a motion to terminate his suspension, and he was ordered to comply with rule 955. The order took effect March 28, 2001.

Horn's misconduct occurred during a period of time when he maintained a business relationship with Professional Account Services Corp. (PASC), a company with offices in Woodland Hills. Horn authorized PASC to use his name in advertisements for legal services and he agreed to provide representation to clients who responded to the ads. He paid the company a monthly fee and allowed it to communicate with clients, bill them and collect fees.

PASC corresponded with clients using letterhead that used the Woodland Hills address as Horn's law office address, even though he maintained his office in Calabasas.

In four separate matters, Horn was retained to seek an early release from incarceration for clients in county jails. Three paid a $1,000 advance fee and the fourth paid $750. Horn did not contact any of the clients or take any action to obtain their release from jail, did not return numerous phone calls and letters from the clients and did not refund the unearned fees.

In a default proceeding, the State Bar Court found that Horn failed to perform legal services competently, communicate with clients, refund unearned fees in all four cases, and he did not release client property in one of the matters.

Horn also was disciplined in 1998 for failing to place client funds in a trust account and failing to promptly pay settlement funds to a doctor at the client's request.

DOUGLAS BRIAN KANE [#92752], 51, of Santa Maria was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on three years of probation with a six-month actual suspension and was ordered to prove his rehabilitation and take the MPRE within one year. Credit was given for an interim suspension which began May 30, 2000, and he has returned to active status. The new order took effect March 28, 2001.

Kane was convicted in March 2000 of possession of methamphetamine. He was arrested when police served a narcotics search warrant and found in his pants pockets three plastic baggies containing about four grams of methamphetamine.

In mitigation, he cooperated with the bar's investigation.

DANIEL D. McLEOD [#127210], 42, of Carmel was suspended for 90 days, stayed, placed on three years of probation and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect March 28, 2001.

McLeod stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently in one case and misused his trust account in another matter.

He represented three family members who paid him $3,500 to handle an appeal from a consent judgment in a long-running boundary and land use dispute. He did not substitute into the case, but prepared a notice of appeal showing his clients in propria persona, and gave the notice to the clients to file. The court clerk asked the family to file a statement of the nature of the case and the issues on appeal; the clients forwarded the request to McLeod, who did not file the statement. As a result, the case was dismissed.

Although McLeod said he would move to set aside the dismissal, he did not do so. However, he did represent the family in settlement negotiations for three months. The clients eventually hired a new attorney and decided not to pursue the appeal.

In the second matter, McLeod wrote 24 checks for personal purposes against his client trust account and wrote one check against insufficient funds.

In mitigation, no clients were harmed by McLeod's actions and he has no record of prior discipline.

GENE MINDEL [#176828], 39, of Van Nuys was suspended for six months, stayed, actually suspended for 30 days and until he makes restitution and the State Bar Court grants a motion to terminate his suspension, and was ordered to take the MPRE. If the actual suspension exceeds 90 days, he must comply with rule 955; if it exceeds two years, he must prove his rehabilitation. The order took effect March 28, 2001.

In a default proceeding, the bar court found that Mindel failed to perform legal services competently, keep a client informed about significant developments in a case, refund unearned fees or cooperate with the bar's investigation.

He was retained by a client who paid him $1,700 to represent him in a quiet title action. Mindel closed his office without notifying the client or doing any work. The client had to hire a new attorney and Mindel never refunded any part of the advance fee.

GARY JOSEPH NEAR [#45678], 61, of San Francisco was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on one year of probation and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect March 28, 2001.

Near stipulated to misconduct in two cases.

A client paid him $3,500 to represent her in a civil matter. She requested a return of the fees two years later, and Near agreed to pay her in three installments. He failed to make any of the payments until after the bar got involved. He also did not keep his address current with the bar and did not cooperate with the bar's investigation.

In the second matter, a client paid Near $2,500 to seek modification of a wage attachment order for child support payments. Near says he concluded modification was not possible. About a year later, the client met with Near because of the lack of progress on the case and requested a return of his file and fees.

Near sent a check after the client complained to the bar.

In mitigation, Near acted in good faith and he ultimately refunded the entire fee to both clients.

KRYSTAL ROSE CLEMENS [#159525], 44, of Anaheim Hills was suspended for six months, stayed, placed on probation for two years and ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect April 1, 2001.

Clemens stipulated that she failed to return a $3,000 advance fee to a dissatisfied client who terminated her services, and she took more than six months to refund $450 in unused costs.

She was hired to handle a divorce for a client who instructed her to do no substantive work without his approval in advance. When the client was served with divorce papers, he called Clemens for a consultation and was told by a paralegal that another attorney in the office decided an alternative path to the dissolution would be appropriate.

When the client could not set up an appointment, he fired Clemens and asked for a return of unearned fees and costs, but was told the advance fee was nonrefundable.

Another attorney in the office contacted the client, who said he had complained to the bar about Clemens but still wanted her office to represent him since he could not afford new counsel. The attorney said Clemens' office would not represent him.

Clemens also was disciplined by the State Bar in August 1996, receiving a public reproval for failing to perform with competence in two client matters.

In mitigation, Clemens was candid and cooperative during the bar's investigation.

RICHARD WAYNE LINDSTROM [#107863], 58, of San Marcos was suspended for one year, stayed, and actually suspended for 90 days and until he files quarterly reports ordered in an earlier disciplinary matter and until the State Bar Court grants a motion to end the actual suspension. If the actual suspension exceeds two years, he must prove his rehabilitation. Lindstrom also was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 955. The order took effect April 1, 2001.

In a default proceeding, the State Bar Court found Lindstrom violated his probation by failing to file two quarterly reports. He was placed on probation and ordered suspended for 60 days in 1997 after he failed to communicate with his clients or notify them when he moved his office. He withdrew from employment without protecting one client's interests and did not refund unearned fees.

In another matter, Lindstrom filed for approval of fees for substituted counsel in 17 unrelated bankruptcy cases. When he failed to appear at a hearing, however, he was sanctioned $500 for each case, totaling $8,500. He never paid the sanctions.

PETER HOWE BLUNT [#153392], 55, of Sausalito was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on probation for one year and actually suspended for six months. He also was ordered to comply with rule 955. The order took effect April 6, 2001.

Last year, Blunt received probation with a six-month actual suspension and was ordered to prove his rehabilitation, take the MPRE within one year and comply with rule 955. But the State Bar Court found he violated the terms of probation by failing to file an affidavit showing compliance with 955.

Blunt was suspended by the Colorado Supreme Court in 1998 for engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, engaging in conduct adversely reflecting on the lawyer's fitness to practice, and for knowingly disobeying an obligation under the rules of a tribunal.

Because his misconduct would warrant discipline in California had it been committed in this state, he was disciplined in California.

Blunt was found in contempt in Colorado for breaching various court orders in a lawsuit filed against him in connection with a real estate partnership, for failing to appear, and for "repeated and intentional" interference with a liquidator in his attempts to sell property.

In mitigation, he cooperated with the bar's investigation.

The probation of DAVID RAMIREZ DeQUIT [#178841], 37, of Olangapo City, The Philippines, was revoked, the stay of suspension lifted and he was actually suspended for six months and was ordered to comply with rule 955. Credit toward the actual suspension will be given for a period of involuntary inactive enrollment which began Nov. 24, 2000. The order took effect April 6, 2001.

The State Bar Court found DeQuit violated his July 1999 probation by failing to file quarterly reports, make restitution, take the MPRE and submit proof of attending ethics school.

That discipline was imposed in a default proceeding, in which the bar court found DeQuit failed to perform legal services competently in a marriage nullification. He failed to prepare and file necessary papers, and when he went to the Philippines on a business trip, he told his client he had given the file to another attorney.

Although he arranged for the other lawyer to make a court appearance for the client, DeQuit did not employ him to perform any other services.

DeQuit never filed substitution of attorney papers and abandoned his client. He did not refund unearned fees.

PATRICK B. KELLY [#55800], 59, of Oceanside was suspended for two years and until he pays restitution to two clients totaling $5,500. He also was ordered to comply with rule 955. The order took effect April 6, 2001.                       

Kelly violated probation stemming from a 1997 suspension: he filed quarterly probation reports and mental health reports late, completed ethics school late and did not file proof of completion of law office management courses on time.

The underlying discipline was the result of misconduct in two client matters. In one instance, he failed to competently perform services when he neglected to timely comply with appropriate government claim-filing procedures for a client who received injuries at a southern California university. The civil action was dismissed as a result of Kelly's failure to comply with those procedures by the required deadline.

In another matter, Kelly was hired by a client and her son to file an appeal of a criminal conviction of the son's daughter. Kelly failed to take any post-conviction action on behalf of the daughter.

Kelly was previously disciplined four times by the State Bar.

KEVIN JOSEPH FRANK [#119102], 42, of Carson was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on probation for two years, actually suspended for 30 days and ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect April 13, 2001.

Frank stipulated that he mishandled a civil matter by filing deficient answers to allegations in a complaint about his client over a period of three months. He did not appear at a hearing on a motion to strike, nor did he oppose the motion. The opposing attorney also served a request for admissions on Frank in the same case, but he did not respond.

The other attorney requested sanctions of $3,325.70 and $1,266.10 for Frank's actions in both matters. Frank eventually was ordered to pay sanctions totaling $1,046 but never did so.

In mitigation, Frank cited severe financial stress connected to the theft of his wallet and his handling of a chaotic criminal case. He had no prior record of discipline and cooperated with the bar's investigation.

MARC SEAN HARVEY [#115689], 41, of Costa Mesa was suspended for three years, stayed, placed on probation for four years, and actually suspended for 18 months and until he has shown proof of rehabilitation, fitness to practice and learning and ability in general law. He also was ordered to take the MPRE, comply with rule 955, abstain from alcohol and narcotics, and attend at least 15 substance abuse meetings per month. The order took effect April 13, 2001.

Harvey stipulated that he was convicted of charges stemming from a cocaine-induced incident in July 1998. He entered several homes as he wandered a residential neighborhood at night and in the early morning, surprising and upsetting residents. No one was harmed and no property was taken.

He was found guilty in criminal court of three counts of trespass with intent to injure property rights, two counts of unauthorized entry into a noncommercial dwelling without consent, two counts of disorderly conduct and loitering on private property, and one count of possessing drug paraphernalia.

He was sentenced to three years of probation.

While on probation in 1999 for that matter, he was charged in Los Angeles with possession of cocaine and possession of a device for smoking a controlled substance. He failed to appear at a hearing on the charges and a $100,000 bench warrant was issued for his arrest. Six weeks later, Harvey was arrested again for cocaine possession and police had to use force to arrest him.

He pleaded guilty to two counts of felony possession of cocaine and was placed on three years of probation.

Harvey also stipulated that he was charged last year in Ventura County with felony cocaine possession and two misdemeanors: being under the influence of cocaine and possessing a smoking device.

He has been suspended from practice since Sept. 27, 1999.

In mitigation, Harvey lives in a residential drug and alcohol recovery home and is enrolled in a variety of counseling programs. He was not practicing law at the time of the misconduct, he had family problems, cooperated with the bar's investigation and presented many references attesting to his good character.

JOHN J. KOZLOWSKI [#146169], 52, of Santa Rosa was suspended for two years, stayed, actually suspended for 90 days and placed on probation for two years. He also was ordered to take the MPRE within one year and comply with rule 955. The order took effect April 13, 2001.

Kozlowski's misconduct stems from five client matters. One client was ordered deported after Kozlowski did not notify him of a hearing date, despite repeated phone calls the client made seeking case updates. Another client's immigration application for permanent status was denied after Kozlowski failed to file it, extend the deadline or notify the client of the problem.

A third case was dismissed when Kozlowski failed to appear at hearings. When the client learned of the dismissal, Kozlowski assured her he would have it set aside. But he did not return the client's subsequent phone calls and did not proceed with the case.

In the other cases, Kozlowski failed to respond to a motion for summary judgment, resulting in a ruling in favor of the opposing party, and a client was sanctioned after Kozlowski failed to respond to a motion to expunge.

In mitigation, Kozlowski had no prior record of discipline and cooperated with the bar's investigation.

CHARLES G. LESTER [#160084], 47, of Covina was suspended for five years, stayed, placed on probation for five years, and actually suspended for three years and until he shows proof of rehabilitation, fitness to practice and learning and ability in general law. He also was ordered to take the MPRE during the suspension period and to comply with rule 955. The order took effect April 13, 2001.

Lester stipulated to convictions stemming from three separate criminal cases. In August 1999, he struck a man in the face during an altercation in a motel. After he was arrested, Lester interrupted his conversation with police several times to speak to an imaginary person named Carlos. He admitted to being under the severe influence of drugs at the time. He was convicted of misdemeanor battery and received a suspended sentence of one year in jail. He is currently in a live-in drug treatment program.

In March 2000, Lester was arrested for being under the influence of a controlled substance after opening the doors of cars parked at a gas station while mumbling and acting strangely. He was taken to jail, where he spoke to jail-cell bars as if they were people. He pleaded no contest and received a sentence concurrent with that of the battery conviction.

In August 1999, Lester was arrested for driving under the influence of a controlled substance after driving erratically and crashing into a rock planter. He pleaded no contest and received a sentence concurrent with the other two convictions.

In aggravation, Lester was disciplined in October 1998.

Other aggravating factors include causing harm to the public by battering a person and driving drunk, and showing a pattern of misconduct.

In mitigation, Lester cooperated with the bar's investigation, including agreeing to be put on inactive status.

DEREK ALDEN NGUYEN [#163138], 34, of Millcreek, Wash., was suspended for three years, stayed, and placed on probation for four years and until he makes restitution and shows proof of rehabilitation, fitness to practice and learning and ability in general law. He also was ordered to take the MPRE during the suspension period and comply with rule 955. The order took effect April 13, 2001.

Nguyen stipulated that he violated the terms of probation for a 1998 disciplinary matter, including failure to obtain psychiatric counseling, file five quarterly reports, make restitution to a client, submit proof of attending ethics school or completing MCLE hours. He also did not notify the bar of a change of address.

The underlying discipline was the result of misappropriating $12,000 in settlement proceeds in a personal injury case after he forged the client's signature on the settlement check. The client's share of the settlement was $8,000.

In mitigation, Nguyen is seeing a psychiatrist and had not yet resolved the emotional and mental issues that led to the original discipline. He also experienced financial difficulties, including filing for bankruptcy.

DARNEL A. PARKER [#135739], 40, of La Quinta was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on probation and actually suspended for 120 days. He also was ordered to take the MPRE within one year and comply with rule 955. The order took effect April 13, 2001.

Parker did not comply with the probation requirements of a 1998 probation revocation, which was issued because of his non-compliance with a 1995 disciplinary order.

The underlying discipline was a 1993 conviction for drunk driving and giving false information to a police officer.

VLADIMIR VERHOVSKOY [#97039], 55, of San Diego was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on probation for two years and actually suspended for 60 days. He also was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect April 13, 2001.

Verhovskoy stipulated to misconduct in four consolidated matters, all involving negligence in managing his client trust account. Between June 1998 and January 2000, he issued seven checks drawn from the account against insufficient funds.

In 1999, he commingled personal funds in the client trust account, issuing checks drawn from the account to pay expenses for his law office.

Verhovsky also was disciplined in 1992 for failure to perform competently or promptly return fees, and for failing to comply with conditions of an agreement reached in lieu of discipline.

In mitigation, Verhovsky cooperated with the bar's investigation and volunteered  information about the commingling of funds. He acknowledged his conduct was wrong and has shown willingness to work with the bar in resolving the matter. No clients were harmed or funds misappropriated.

LEO BENSON WILKES [#114253], 46, of Mountain View was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on probation for two years and actually suspended for 30 days. He also was required to take the MPRE within one year and make restitution. The order took effect April 13, 2001.

Wilkes stipulated that he failed to perform with competence in handling a federal race and age discrimination lawsuit he filed in 1998 on behalf of four clients. He became overwhelmed by the complexity and demands of the employment case and failed to meet discovery deadlines, which resulted in more than $11,000 in sanctions. He persuaded his clients to stipulate to dismissing the case in exchange for a waiver of the sanctions against them.

Wilkes also failed to keep his clients informed of developments in the case for almost a year.

In mitigation, Wilkes was suffering from emotional difficulties and severe financial stress. Even before the bar intervened, Wilkes offered to refund his clients' advance fees.

Wilkes was privately reproved in 1996 for failure to perform competently or cooperate with the bar's investigation.

TRACY L. WILLIAMS [#161265], 37, of Vallejo was suspended for one year, stayed, actually suspended for 60 days and until she makes restitution, and was ordered to take the MPRE. If the actual suspension exceeds 90 days, she must comply with rule 955; if it exceeds two years, she must prove her rehabilitation. The order took effect April 13, 2001.

In a default proceeding, the State Bar Court found Williams committed seven acts of misconduct.

She failed to file a bankruptcy proceeding for one client for 14 months, and did not return the client's many phone calls or refund any of her advance fee.

Another client paid Williams $300 to complete a client's patent application. Time was of the essence - the deadline was 60 days later - but Williams did not file the papers, request a time extension or return her client's phone calls. Five days before the deadline, the client fired Williams and retrieved his file. He later asked for a refund and an accounting, but Williams did not provide either.

INTERIM SUSPENSION

SCOTT ALLEN BRANDON [#189654], 36, of Brea was placed on interim suspension March 9, 2001, following convictions for assault on a police officer and possession of a controlled substance. He was ordered to comply with rule 955.

JAMES M. CULLITON [#118949], 54, of Sacramento was placed on interim suspension March 17, 2001, following a conviction for making a false statement to the Federal Aviation Administration. He was ordered to comply with rule 955.

ANDERSON LIGHTFOOT JONAS [#86193], 51, of Los Angeles was placed on interim suspension April 10, 2001, following convictions of child endangerment, driving under the influence and reckless driving. He was ordered to comply with rule 955.

MICHAEL HOANG  DO [#154567], 42, of San Jose was placed on interim suspension April 16, 2001, following a conviction of committing a lewd act on a child under 18. He was ordered to comply with rule 955.

STEVEN HYUN KIM [#189746], 32, of Los Angeles was placed on interim suspension April 16, 2001, following convictions of four counts of robbery. He was ordered to comply with rule 955.

RESIGNATION/CHARGES PENDING

JOHN GERARD HEDDERMAN [#134109], 40, of Westminster (Feb. 3, 2001)

LOUIS STEVEN SANCHEZ [#82775], 54, of Glendale (Feb. 3, 2001)

BRUCE ALLAN NAHIN [#77546], 47, of Valencia (Feb. 4, 2001)

DAVID HAMPTON TEDDER [#62983], 54, of Santa Ana (Feb. 16, 2001)

RUSSELL N. BAUGH [#124165], 44, of Stockton (Feb. 21, 2001)

JOHN PRICE BREMNER [#84926], 52, of Ross (Feb. 21, 2001)

JEFFREY ALLEN GOLDMAN [#108362], 52, of Burbank (Feb. 21, 2001)

JANICE J. DOEZIE [#132246], 51, of Orange (March 1, 2001)

TRACY DARLENE BEALL [#161168], 37, of Mechanicsburg, Ohio (March 11, 2001)

RONALD E. LAIS [#66511], 58, of Anaheim Hills (March 11, 2001)

JAMES E. DeFRANTZ [#165780], 42, of Hayward (March 15, 2001)

ROBERT GORDON TUNNELL JR. [#49832], 62, of San Francisco (March 15, 2001)

WALTER FRANCIS CONDON [#79898], 77, of Pacifica (March 22, 2001)

JOHN ROBERT PASTO [#67079], 53, of Lafayette (March 22, 2001)

CHRISTINA M. ARNALL [#85869], 51 of Northridge (April 1, 2001)

WILLIAM FENTON MACKLIN [#82389], 52, of El Centro (April 1, 2001)

GIL S. MAGLO [#134938], 49, of Torrance (April 1, 2001)

JAMES L. SACCHERI [#67381], 55, of Fresno (April 1, 2001)

CURTIS CHAPMAN SIMPSON III [#101950], 49, of Santa Barbara (April 1, 2001)

TIMOTHY ERIC MEYER [#101098], 46, of Sherman Oaks (April 8, 2001)

SUSPENSION/FAILURE TO PASS PRE

PETER SMITH FULLERTON [#86798], 57, of London (Jan. 8, 2001)

JOHNNY ELEUTARIO MOSQUEDA [#162225], 53, of Chino Hills (Jan. 25, 2001)

ARTHUR HOW FONG [#80048], 54, of Hacienda Heights (April 5, 2001)

BRUCE CLINTON HILL [#43427], 58, of Woodland Hills (April 16, 2001)

DAVID ALLEN TALLEY [#148057], 41, of Suisun (April 16, 2001)
PUBLIC REPROVAL
JOHN MICHAEL McKENNA [#91174], 51, of Tustin (Oct. 5, 2000)
CLARIFICATION
JAMES RICHARD BOYD [#175597], 35, of San Diego was recently disciplined by the State Bar for failing to perform legal services competently. He should not be confused with JAMES GREGORY BOYD [#179828], 46, also of San Diego, who is an attorney in good standing and has no record of discipline.