Search 

Azcourts.gov

Arizona Judicial Branch

2003 Disciplinary Cases Matrix
 

Please use the CTRL+F command on your keyboard to find specific names within this page. Return to the main Disciplinary Cases Matrix page.

 

Case Name
Date/Number

Violations Description
Disciplinary Rules

Hearing Officer Recommended Disciplinary Commission Recommended Supreme Court Sanction Comments

Adair, Marc A.

08/11/03

DC No. 01-1671

SB-03-0116-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent represented a client in a post-conviction criminal matter. Respondent was retained to seek Federal Habeas Corpus relief for the client. Respondent was negligent in diligently pursuing the client’s matter, failed to properly communicate with the client, failed to properly handle the client’s money and knowingly made misrepresentations to his client and a third person. Respondent did not have procedures in place to make sure the ethical rules were conformed to and he initially failed to cooperate with the State Bar.

ERs 1.3, 1.4(a) and (b), 1.5(a), 1.15(a) and (b), 4.1(a), 5.1(a), 8.1(b), 8.4(c), and SCRs 43, 44, and 51(h) and (i).

N/A

Agreement for Censure and 1 year of Probation (LOMAP)

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(h);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (c) (d) and (m).

Mental State: Negligent

Potential injury

Apker, David B.

08/23/03

DC No. 01-0915

SB – 03-0029-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to diligently pursue his client’s matter and failed to communicate with his client. Respondent retired and moved out of state without notifying his client and also failed to protect the clients’ interest upon termination of representation. Respondent also failed to respond to the State Bar’s investigation.

ER 1.3, 1.4, 1.16(b) and (d), 3.4(c), 8.1(b), 8.4(d), and SCRs 31(c)(3) and 51(e), (h) and (i).

6 months and 1 day Suspension and Restitution

View Report

6 months and 1 day Suspension and Restitution

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22 (a)(c)(d)(e)(i);

In mitigation:

9.32(m).

Mental State: Knowing

Actual injury

Bayless, Dennis P.

06/30/03

DC No. 01-1267

SB-03-0098-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to respond and cooperate with the State Bar in its investigation of an underlying matter that was ultimately dismissed, even after being ordered to do so by the hearing officer.

ER 8.1 and SCRs 51(h) and (i).

Censure

View Report

Censure

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (d) (e) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b).

Mental State: Negligent

Potential injury

Baskerville, Cal

01/23/03

DC No. 01-1511

SB-03-0006-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to properly safeguard client funds in that there were 4 disbursement errors that resulted in client funds on deposit in Respondent’s trust account being negligently converted. Respondent also failed to conduct monthly reconciliation of his trust account and failed to maintain proper internal controls to adequately safeguard funds on deposit in his trust account.

ER 1.15 and SCRs 43(d) and 44(b).

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for Censure and 1 year of Probation (LOMAP/TAEEP)

View Report

No discretionary review.

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (c) (i);

In mitigation: 9.32(b) (d) (e) (g) and interim rehabilitation.

Mental State: Negligent

Potential injury

Blake, Lee P.

3/07/03

DC No. 01-1624, 01-2198

SB-03-0022-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent engaged in the unauthorized practice of law while suspended for non-payment of dues and non-compliance with Rule 45, Mandatory Continuing Legal Education requirements. Although Respondent had completed the MCLE requirements, he failed to file the required affidavit.

ERs 3.4(c), 5.5, 8.4(c) and (d) and SCRs 31(a)(3) and 51(f).

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for Censure and 2 years of Probation (MAP)

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

No factors present in aggravation;

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (b) (c) (d) (e), (g) (h) and (l).

Mental State: Knowing

Minimal potential injury

Significant mitigation present reducing presumptive sanction from suspension to censure including self disclosure.

Bertz, James E.

04/23/03

DC No. 00-0117 et al.

SB-03-0024-D

(By Judgment)

In four separate complaints involving over 20 charges Respondent abandoned the practice of law and failed to perform services for clients. Respondent engaged in a pattern of neglect and failed to competently and diligently represent clients. In addition, Respondent practiced law while summarily suspended for nonpayment of dues and was placed on interim suspension. Respondent further failed to respond or cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation.

ERs 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.15, 1.16, 1.16(d), 3.2, 3.4, 5.5, 8.1(b), 8.4, 8.4(c) and (d), SCRs 31(c)(3) and 51(h) and (i).

Disbarment and Restitution

Disbarment and Restitution

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(c) (d) (e) (g) (h) and (j);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) and (f).

Mental State: Knowing

Serious and potential injury

Blasingim-Stenzel, Arla H.

10/29/03

DC Nos. 01-1045 et al.

SB-03-0127-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent accepted retainers from numerous clients and then virtually abandoned those clients. Overall, Respondent failed to communicate with clients and failed to perform services on behalf of the clients. Respondent failed to preserve client property and converted client funds. Respondent submitted altered documents to the court without the knowledge or consent of her client and failed to respond or cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation.

ERs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.15, 1.16, 3.3(a), 8.1(b), 8.4, 8.4(c) and SCRs 43, 44, 51(h) and (i).

Disbarment and Restitution

View Report

Disbarment and Restitution

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(b) (c) (d) (e) (h) and (j);

In mitigation:

9.32(a).

Mental State: Knowing

Serious injury

Brown, Bradford T.

12/09/03

DC No. 02-1426

SB-03-0143-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent engaged in the unauthorized practice of law for approximately 4 months while under summary suspension for failure to comply with MCLE requirements. Respondent also failed to cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation.

ER 5.5, 8.4(c) and (d), and SCRs 51(b), (e), (f), (h) and (i).

N/A

Agreement for Censure and 1 year of Probation (LOMAP audit if return to private practice)

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (e) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) (c) (g) and (k).

Mental State: Should have known /knowingly

Potential injury

Cimino Robert.

07/01/03

DC. Nos. 01-0627

SB-03-0079-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent engaged on a pattern of neglect with numerous clients by failing to communicate with and diligently represent those clients. Respondent also engaged in the unauthorized practice of law while summarily suspended for noncompliance with MCLE requirements.

ER 1.3, 1.4, 1.16(d), 5.5 and 8.4(d).

N/A

Agreement for 6 months Suspension (retroactive) and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP with PM//MAP) and fee arbitration

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (c) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) (c) (e) (g) and (l).

Mental State: Knowing

Injury not specifically addressed; however, it appears there was potential injury.

Clark, Carroll A.

11/19/03

DC Nos. 00-1976 et al.

SB-03-0107-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to communicate with or diligently represent his clients; failed to promptly deliver funds to a client and protect the client’s interests upon termination of representation. In addition,

Respondent willfully violated a court order and refused to respond or cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation.

ER 1.3, 1.4, 1.15(b), 1.16(d), 8.1(b), 8.4(a) and SCRs 51(e), (h), (i) and (k).

Censure and Restitution

View Report

60 day Suspension and Restitution

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (d) (e) (i) and (j);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) (c) (g) (k) and (l).

Mental State: Knowing

Actual injury

Cord, Chadwick M.

06/01/03

DC Nos. 01-1213, 01-2148

SB-03-0075-D

(By Judgment)

While suspended, Respondent represented a client in a child-custody matter, sending letters to opposing counsel and to a medical professional in the matter. Respondent, in his affidavit for reinstatement, stated that he had sent a check to the State Bar to pay the State Bar’s costs in the previous suspension matter. The check was post-dated. Respondent’s statement in his affidavit for reinstatement lead to the belief that payment had been made, not that payment would be perfected in another few weeks. ER 3.3(a)(1), 3.4(c), 5.5, 8.1(a) and (c) and 8.4(c) and (d) and SCRs 51(e) (f) and (k).

6 months and 1 day Suspension

View Report

6 months and 1 day Suspension

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (d) (f) and (g);

In mitigation:

9.32(e).

Mental State: Knowing

Actual injury to legal system

Counce, David W.

06/02/03

DC No. 01-2359

SB-03-0071-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to diligently represent a client, failed to communicate with the client and, upon termination of the representation, failed to return the client’s file when the client requested that he do so. Respondent also failed to respond to the State Bar inquiries concerning this matter.

ERs 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.16(d), 3.1, 8.1(b) and Rule 51(h) and (i).

6 months and 1 day Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP) upon reinstatement

View Report

6 months and 1 day Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP) upon reinstatement

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(e) (g) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(a).

Mental State: Knowing

Injury not specifically discussed.

Cozier, Clifford G.

01/08/03

DC No. 00-2552

SB-02-0147-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent represented a client in a probate matter and the petition filed claimed that the decedent’s son’s whereabouts were unknown. As a result, the decedent’s son was declared deceased and the daughter was appointed as the personal representative without bond as the sole heir. Respondent was aware that there was purportedly a holographic will, yet claimed in the court papers that there were no known unrevoked testamentary papers. The son’s attorney later filed a request for bond and an objection to the determination of heirs showing that he had maintained the same Tempe address since 1984 and had been a resident of Arizona since approximately 1973. The court overturned its earlier ruling that the daughter was the only heir and ordered that she file a bond and an accounting. Respondent failed to inform his client of the ruling and then filed a petition for formal probate of a lost or destroyed will. The son filed a motion to dismiss the petition for formal probate as well as moving to remove the daughter as the personal representative which was granted. Respondent failed to file any response to the petition and motion and the daughter was removed. Respondent notified his client of the ruling and that he would be filing a motion for reconsideration, which he then failed to do. Both Respondent and his client were sanctioned in the amount of the son’s attorney’s fees. Respondent also failed to respond or cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation.

ERs 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.16(d), 8.1 and SCRs 51(h) and (i).

9 months Suspension

View Report

9 months Suspension

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(e), (g) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) and (k).

Mental State: Knowing

Potential injury

Crocker, Eric G.

06/16/03

DC No. 01-0165

SB-03-0077-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent represented a client in a personal injury matter. In investigating the client’s charges, the State Bar reviewed Respondent’s trust account and found that Respondent failed to maintain individual client ledgers and failed to perform monthly reconciliations of his trust account. In addition, Respondent failed to safeguard funds in his trust account.

ER 1.15 and SCRs 43 and 44.

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for Censure and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP/TAEEP) and Restitution

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(c);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (b) (c) (g) and (l).

Mental State: Negligent

Actual injury

Crown, Thaine M. Jr.

10/29/03

DC Nos. 01-0732, et al.

SB-03-0129-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent wrote a check from his trust account to pay for a State Bar Continuing Education

Seminar. The check was returned with a request for production of trust account records. A review of the trust account revealed that Respondent was writing checks from his trust account to cover general business expenses. In addition, Respondent in other counts engaged in a pattern of neglect with respect to client matters, failed to perform services, failed to adequately communicate with clients and made false statements of material fact. Respondent further failed to cooperate with the State Bar in its investigation.

ERs 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.15(a), 1.16(d), 3.2, 4.1, 8.1(b), and 8.4(d), and SCRs 43, 44 and 51(h) and (i).

6 months and 1 day Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOAMP/EEP) upon reinstatement

View Report

6 months and 1 day Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOAMP/EEP) upon reinstatement

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(d) (e) (g) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) and (b).

Mental State: Knows or should have known

Potential injury

Decker, Craig A.

04/23/03

DC Nos. 99-1778, 00-1281

SB-03-0028-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to sufficiently communicate and consult with his clients regarding the negotiation and settlement of the outstanding third party creditors’ account and the delays involved in the negotiation and settlement. Respondent failed to provide an accounting and withdraw from representation when requested. Respondent further failed to promptly and diligently resolve the clients’ account with the outstanding third party creditor or to seek modifications of the conditions attached to a dismissal of the clients’ bankruptcy. Respondent also failed to respond or cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation.

ERs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.15(b), 1.16(a)(3), 8.1(b), 8.4(d), and SCRs 44(b)(3), 51(h) and (i).

6 month Suspension and 2 years of Probation (Practice Monitor/MAP)

View Report

6 months and 1 day Suspension and 2 years of Probation (Practice Monitor/MAP)

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (c) (d) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) (c) (e) and (l).

Mental State: Negligent, however, Respondent was previously disciplined for similar misconduct; therefore, Standard 8.2, with the presumptive sanction of suspension, is applied). In addition, mitigating factor 9.32(c) is given little weight.

 

Actual injury to legal system by failure to respond.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Flater, Ronald W.

11/17/03

DC Nos. 01-1377, et al.

SB-03-0141-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent is not a member of the State Bar of Arizona but practiced law in Arizona, doing business as “Immigration Counselors USA.” Respondent engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, failed to diligently pursue his clients’ cases and to adequately communicate with his clients, failed to return unused portions of his clients’ fees and to abide by his clients’ decisions concerning the scope of the representation. Respondent also failed to properly supervise his office staff, engaged in conduct involving fraud, deceit, dishonesty or misrepresentation, engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, falsely advertised that he was an Arizona attorney. Respondent further failed to protect client funds and failed to respond or cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation.

ERs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.15, 1.16, 5.3, 5.5, 7.1, 8.1(b) and 8.4(c) and (d) and SCRs 51(h) and (i).

Censure and Restitution

View Report

Censure and Restitution

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

Non-member. Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) and (i);

No factors in mitigation.

Mental State : Knowing

Actual injury

Disbarment would have been the appropriate sanction if Respondent had been a member of the State Bar.

Fortner, William B.

12/08/03

DC Nos. 00-1999, et al.

SB-03-0144-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent was negligent in administering his trust account. He failed to deposit bankruptcy filing fees into his trust account, and instead deposited those funds into his general operating account. Respondent also engaged in a pattern neglect and lack of diligence in representing clients and in supervising his non-lawyer staff.

ER 1.3, 1.15, 5.3, 8.4(d) and SCRs 43 and 44.

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for Censure and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP/PM)

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (c) (d) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) (d) (e) (l) and (m).

Mental State: Negligent

Potential injury

Forquer, Robert C.

10/29/03

DC No. 99-2173

SB-03-0122-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent pled guilty to a Class 6 undesignated offense of attempted sexual abuse of a person 15 years old or older. In August 1999, Respondent hired a 16-year-old minor as a fill-in secretary while his secretary was on leave. Respondent acknowledged inappropriately touching the minor’s breast.

ER 8.4(b) and SCR 57(a).

N/A

Agreement for 4 months Suspension and 2 years of Probation (consistent with terms of criminal probation)

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(h);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (b) (e) (g) (k) (l) and (m).

Mental State: Knowing

Actual injury

Friedlander, Harry P.

03/26/03

DC No. 00-2172

SB-03-0027-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent represented a client in a lawsuit against Cigna Healthcare. The client paid Respondent a total of $5,000.00 to depose an expert witness and present that expert’s testimony at an arbitration hearing. Although Respondent received that payment, he failed to depose the expert or use the expert at the hearing. In addition, Respondent failed to hold the client’s funds separate and apart from his own funds, failed to maintain complete trust account records of the handling, maintenance and disposition of all client funds, failed to keep complete records of the funds placed in his trust account, failed to exercise due professional care in the performance of his duties under the Trust Account Guidelines, failed to have and/or use internal controls in his office that were adequate under the circumstances to safeguard funds held in trust, failed to promptly and completely record all client trust account transactions, failed to create and/or maintain records complying with the rules and Trust Account Guidelines, failed to make all trust account disbursements by pre-numbered check, and failed to perform monthly reconciliation of the trust account records and bank statements.

ER 1.15(a), and SCRs 43(a) and (d) (Guidelines 1.a, 1.c, 1.d, 1.e, 2.c and 2.e) and 44(b)(3).

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for Censure and 1 year of Probation (LOMAP)

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (c) (d) (h) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) (d) (e) (g) (l) and (m).

Mental State: Knew or should have known

Potential injury

Significant mitigation present reduced the presumptive sanction of suspension.

Garcia, Maximiliano S.

03/28/03

DC Nos. 99-0906 et al.

SB-03-0009-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent abandoned numerous clients and their files, failed to competently or diligently represent his clients, failed to adequately communicate with his clients, failed to return unearned retainers, even after being ordered to do so by courts. Respondent was not candid to the courts or clients when he stated he would return the unused portions of retainers, he failed to expedite litigation, and engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. Respondent advised a client erroneously to admit being in the United States illegally, which led to his client’s deportation. Respondent also failed to represent a client or inform opposing counsel of being retained to represent that client, failed to return funds or property in his possession when the representation ended, and failed to respond or cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation.

ERs 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.15, 1.16, 3.2, 3.3, 4.1, 8.1(b), 8.4 and SCRs 51(e), (h), (i) and (k).

Disbarment and Restitution

View Report

Disbarment and Restitution

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) and (k).

In mitigation:

9.32(a).

Mental State: Knowing

Actual injury

Geare, Patrick J.

12/05/03

DC Nos. 00-1635 et al.

SB-03-0139-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to maintain a trust account for the safekeeping of client funds at a time when substantial worker’s compensation benefits were being paid to him for benefit of his clients. Respondent also failed to act with diligence, communicate with clients or take appropriate steps to protect the client’s interests.

ER 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.15, 1.16, 8.4 and SCRs 43 and 44.

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for 90 days Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP) upon reinstatement

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(c) (d) and (h);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (b) (b) (d) (e) (g) (i) (j) and (l).

Mental State: Knowing

Potential injury

Gliege, John G.

02/20/03

DC Nos. 00-0309, 01-1296

SB-03-0014-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent issued checks for amounts in excess of the balance in his trust account causing account overdrafts and commingled client funds with his personal/firm’s funds.

ER 1.15 and SCRs 43 and 44.

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for Censure and 1 year of Probation (LOMAP)

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (c)(d) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) (c) (d) (e) (g) (h) (l) and (m).

Mental State: Negligent

Potential injury

Gollin, Morton

06/30/03

DC No. 02-0052

SB-03-0099-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent represented a client in an Arizona personal injury action when he was not admitted to practice in Arizona. Respondent also made false and misleading representations to the opposing party, the insurance company, regarding the legal guardianship of his minor client. Respondent failed to turn over the personal injury settlement proceeds to the true legal guardian of the minor.

ERs 1.2, 1.15, 4.1, 5.5 and 8.4(c).

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for Censure

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

Non-Member. In aggravation:

9.22(i);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (b) and (e).

Mental State: Knowing

Injury not discussed.

If member, suspension would have been appropriate.

Gwilliam, Dale R.

01/22/03

DC No. 01-2294

SB-03-0004-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent engaged in the practice of law while suspended for failure to provide his MCLE certificate. Respondent failed to inform the clients of his summary suspension and failed to cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation.

ER 5.5(a), 8.1 and 8.4(a) and Rules 31(a)(3), 33(c) and 51(h).

Censure

View Report

Censure

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a);

In mitigation:

9.32 (b) (c) (d) (e) and (l).

Mental State: Knowing

Significant mitigation present reduced presumptive sanction of suspension.

No actual or potential injury

Hart, Donald W.

08/13/03

DC No. 01-1850

SB-03-0104-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent’s misconduct involved representing a client in a bankruptcy matter while suspended from the practice of law. Respondent failed to inform his client, other counsel and the court that he had been suspended from the practice of law.

ERs 1.16(a)(1), 3.4(c), 5.5(a), 8.4(c) and (d), and SCRs 31(a)(3), 33(c) and 51(e) and (f).

6 month Suspension and Restitution

View Report

30 day Suspension and Restitution

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(d) (g) (h) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (b) (d) and (l).

Mental State: Knowing

Actual injury

Hineman, Phillip D., Jr.

01/08/03

DC Nos. 99-1374 et al.

SB-02-0154-D

(By Judgment)

While representing a client in a criminal matter, Respondent entered into a business transaction with his client to satisfy unpaid legal fees. Absent advice from independent counsel, Respondent then failed to obtain the client’s written consent to proceed with the transaction. In subsequent counts, Respondent erred in billing and overcharged the client and the fee agreement did not adequately communicate or explain the basis for the fees.

ERs 1.5(a) and (b) and 1.8(a).

Censure and 1 year of Probation (LOMAP/PM)

Censure and 1 year of Probation (LOMAP/PM)

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (d) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) (d) (e) and (l).

Mental State: Negligent

No actual harm and little likelihood of potential injury.

Hull, Hugh W.

08/14/03

DC Nos. 01-2001 et al.

SB-03-0102-D

(By Judgment)

In April 2001, Respondent was summarily suspended for his failure to pay dues and to comply with Rule 45, Mandatory Continuing Legal Education requirements. Respondent was not reinstated from those suspensions. Among the conduct warranting disbarment in this matter, Respondent failed to undertake diligent actions consistent with the goals of the representation, failed to keep clients’ informed about the status of their matters and failed to comply with requests for information. Respondent failed to perform services when fees had been paid by the clients and subsequently failed to refund the unearned portion of those fees. Respondent engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud or deceit and also failed to respond or cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation. Respondent further engaged in the unauthorized practiced of law while suspended.

ERs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.15, 5.5, 8.1(b) and 8.4.

Disbarment and Restitution

View Report

Disbarment and Restitution

View Report

Notice of Omission

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (g)

(h) (i) and (j);

No factors in mitigation.

Mental State: Knowing

Actual injury

Johnson, Stephen M.

09/11/03

DC Nos. 00-1856 et al.

SB-03-0120-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent’s misconduct in fourteen counts primarily consisted of the failure to act diligently and to adequately communicate with his clients. Respondent failed to respond to requests for information concerning the status of their cases and to provide an accounting of the fees paid. In addition, Respondent was held in contempt for repeated violations of orders to file opening briefs and for his repeated lack of candor in his requests for extensions. Respondent also failed to promptly respond to the State Bar’s investigation of these matters.

ERs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.15(b), 1.16(d), 8.1(b), 8.4(c) and (d) and SCRs 51(h) and (i).

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for 6 and 1 day Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP/MAP) upon reinstatement

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (c) and (d);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) (c) (d) (e) (g) and (l).

Mental State: Knowing

Potential injury

Kazaragis, Gary W.

08/07/03

DC No. 02-0157

SB-03-0115-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent’s trust account. Respondent failed to maintain complete trust account records and to exercise due professional care, failed to maintain a general ledger reflecting the ongoing balance in the trust account and failed to record all transactions promptly and completely. Respondent had already taken remedial measures to correct his trust account problems by the time the consent documents were filed.

ER 1.15 and SCRs 43 and 44.

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for Censure and 1 year of Probation (LOMAP)

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(i);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (b) (d) (e) and (l).

Mental State: Negligent

Potential injury

Kelly, Michael E.

10/29/03

DC Nos. 00-1497

SB-03-0124-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to adequately supervise his secretary/legal assistant who was responsible for the day-to-day administration of his law office. This employee hid and/or destroyed correspondence, failed to send correspondence as directed, misled or lied to clients and others, and affixed date stamps, court file stamps and judges’ signatures to fictitious or false documents. Without Respondent’s knowledge or direction, his employee communicated with clients and others who believed they were Respondent’s clients, accepted funds from and made “refunds” to various individuals who were ostensibly Respondent’s clients, and prepared and signed Respondent’s name to and filed various pleadings. As a result of the employee’s failure to give messages to Respondent, he failed to attend hearings, failed to provide accountings to clients, failed to promptly provide a refund of unearned funds, and failed to promptly return client papers and property at the conclusion of representation.

ER 5.3.

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for 45 day Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP) and Restitution

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (c) (d) (h) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) (c) (d) (e) (g) (k) (l) and (m).

Mental State: Negligent

Actual injury

Kirkland, St. George, Charles

03/20/03

DC Nos. 00-1039 et al.

SB-03-0010-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent engaged in multiple acts of misconduct, the most serious misconduct involved a lack of candor in his dealings with the court, opposing parties and counsel in his efforts to obtain excess proceeds from foreclosure sales. Respondent admitted to submitting false pleadings, failed to take remedial action upon discovery that the pleadings were false, and as a result of his failure to take remedial action, the legal proceedings were affected.

ERs 1.1, 1.3, 3.1, 3.3(a)(1), 3.4(c), 4.4, 5.3, and 8.4(d).

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for a 4 year Suspension and Restitution

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (b) (c) and (d);

In mitigation:

9.32(e).

Mental State: Knowing

Actual injury

Klahr, Gary Peter

01/08/03

DC Nos. 00-0797 et al.

SB-02-0138-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent engaged in various acts of misconduct that included entering into agreements to represent clients in various legal matters then assigning the matters to a contract attorney who was unsupervised by Respondent. Multiple matters under this arrangement resulted in the clients’ legal interests being adversely affected by his failure and/or the failure of the contract attorney to perform the required legal services. Respondent entered into “non-refundable” fee contracts with clients and in cases where Respondent did not fully earn the funds; yet he refused to later return the unearned portion of the funds to the client. Over a prolonged period of time, Respondent allowed unqualified and unsupervised persons to manage and actively participate in his law practice. Respondent abdicated his duties to oversee and supervise both his non-lawyer staff and his contract attorneys.

ERs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5(a), 1.15, 1.16, 3.2, 5.1, 5.3, 8.4 and SCRs 51(h) and (i).

Disbarment and Restitution

View Report

Disbarment and Restitution

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (g) (h) and (j);

In mitigation:

9.32(c) and (g).

Mental State: Knowing

Actual injury

Lamm, Jason D.

03/26/03

DC No. 01-1570

SB-03-0026-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent was a Deputy Maricopa County Attorney. Prior to leaving the County Attorney’s Office, he was told of the investigation and subsequent arrest of Terry Alexander. While Mr. Alexander was in custody at the Madison Street Jail, Respondent misled a detention officer in order to talk to Mr. Alexander while he was in custody. Respondent intended to leave the County Attorney’s Office to go into criminal defense work and spoke with Mr. Alexander thinking he could solicit a future referral. Respondent’s statements to Mr. Alexander caused Mr. Alexander to misunderstand Respondent’s role and Respondent did nothing to correct this misunderstanding.

ERs 4.3, 7.3 and 8.4(c).

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for Censure and 1 year of Probation (MAP/EEP)

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(b);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (e) and (l);

Mental State: Negligent

Potential injury

Lopez, Anthony R., Jr.

02/21/03

DC No. 98-2215

SB-03-0012-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to operate and maintain his trust account in accordance with the Supreme court Rules and Trust Account Guidelines. Respondent did not maintain a check register or individual client ledgers. This caused overdrafts to occur in the trust account and client funds to be compromised. Respondent failed to reconcile the trust account on a monthly basis and failed to use pre-numbered checks for disbursements.

ER 1.15 and SCRs 43, 44, and 51(h).

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for Censure and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP)

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) and (c);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) (c) (e) (j) (l) and (g).

Mental State: Know or should have known

Potential injury

MacDonald, Rand

08/13/03

DC Nos. 01-1161, 01-1428

SB-03-0082-D

(By Judgment)

In one matter, Respondent failed to perform services requested by his client, failed to return his client’s telephone calls and update her on the status of her case, and falsely advised his client that he would commence work on her case in the near future. In the other matter, Respondent failed to diligently pursue a client’s case, resulting in its dismissal for lack of prosecution. In both matters, Respondent failed to respond and cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation.

ERs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 3.2, 8.1(b), 8.4(d) and SCRs 51(h) and (i).

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for 30 day Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOAMP/MAP)

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (c) (d) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) (c) (d) (e) (g) and (l).

Mental State: Knowing

No actual harm to the client; minimal harm to legal system for failure to respond.

Marquez, O. Mark

07/01/03

DC No. 01-0370

SB-03-0072-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent’s misconduct involved making unwelcome sexual comments and unwelcome touching of an opposing party, who was representing herself pro per. Respondent persisted in this conduct in the face of repeated and forceful rejections of his advances. Respondent then denied the allegations, until confronted with a tape recording of one of the instances. Respondent then engaged in unjustified attacks on the credibility of the complainant in the matter, which the Disciplinary Commission found to constitute the submission of false evidence to the Bar during its investigation.

ERs 1.7, 8.1(a) and 8.4(d).

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for 30 day Suspension and 1 year of Probation (MAP/Written apology to Complainant)

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(b) (c) (d) (f) (g) (h) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) (g) and (l).

Mental State: Knowing

Potential injury

McVay, J. Douglas

02/25/03

DC Nos. 01-0764 et al.

SB-03-0018-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent represented three separate clients in different criminal matters and in his representation, failed to act with reasonable diligence, failed to properly and adequately communicate with the clients, failed to render an accounting of his fees when requested and failed to provide documents to a client upon request.

ERs 1.3, 1.4, 1.15(b), 1.16(d) and 8.4(d).

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for Censure and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP)

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (d) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) and (e).

Mental State: Negligent

Injury was not specifically discussed but it appears there was actual injury in that the client’s case was closed because of Respondent’s failure to file the petition for review.

Mendoza, Ramon S.

09/11/03

DC No. 01-0894 et al.

SB-03-0112-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent’s misconduct involved the failure to follow client directions concerning the scope of representation, failure to diligently represent and adequately communicate with his clients, failure to properly safeguard client property, failure to promptly deliver funds belonging to the client, failure to expedite the client’s cases, failure to properly reconcile his trust account and maintain proper trust account records and engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. In addition, Respondent also failed to respond or cooperate with State Bar during its investigation.

ERs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.15(a), 1.15(b), 1.16, 3.2, 8.1(b), 8.4 and SCRs 43, 44, 51(h) and (i).

N/A

View Agreement

Agreement for 18 months Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP/MAP)

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22 (c) (d) (e);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (b) and (c).

Mental State: Knowing

Injury was not specifically discussed.

Mirescu, Claudia

08/07/03

DC No. 01-1534

SB-03-0114-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent represented a client in a dissolution case involving visitation issues. Respondent counseled her client to take the child from the mother in violation of a court order.

ERs 1.2(d), 3.4(c) and 8.4(a) and (d).

N/A

Agreement for Censure

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

No factors in aggravation;

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (b) (d) (e) (g) and (l).

Mental State: Knowing

Potential injury

Moak, Walter E.

06/16/03

DC Nos. 00-0258, 00-0698

SB-03-0007-D

(By Opinion)

Respondent represented a client involved in two actions arising out of two car accidents that occurred approximately three years apart. Respondent failed to disclose, in the action based on the first accident, the injuries his client received in the second accident. Respondent also failed to distinguish appropriately the injuries his client received in the second accident from the first accident. In another matter, Respondent’s wife loaned money to his client. This involved a conflict of interest, as Respondent’s responsibilities to his wife could have affected his representation of the client and Respondent acquired a proprietary interest in the litigation he was conducting for the client.

ERs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.7(b), 1.8(e) and (j), 1.9, 3.3, 4.1, 8.4(c) and (d), and SCRs 51(e).

6 months and 1 day Suspension

View Report

6 months Suspension

View Report

Sua Sponte review.

 

6 months and 1 day Suspension

View Opinion

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In aggravation:

9.22(b) (c) (d) and (e);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (e) (k) and (l).

Mental State: Knowing

Potential injury

Mothershed, George L.

09/15/03

DC No. 01-1927

SB-03-0109-D

(By Judgment)

After several unsuccessful attempts to become licensed in Arizona, Respondent simply began holding himself out as a licensed attorney and engaging in the unauthorized practice of law in both state and federal courts in Arizona.

ERs 4.1, 5.5 and 8.4(c) and (d), and SCRs 31(a)(3) and 51(b), (e), (f), (h) and (i).

Censure

View Report

Censure

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

Non-Member. Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(a) (c) (d) and (g);

No factors in mitigation.

Mental State: with the intent to deceive and knowing;

Actual injury

If member, disbarment would have been appropriate.

Musselman, D. John

01/08/03

DC Nos. 01-0062, 01-0213

SB-02-0148-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent engaged in the unauthorized practice of law while suspended and did not inform clients of his suspension. Respondent wrote demand letters for two clients in their personal injury cases. Even though Respondent did not sign the letters representing he was an attorney, the letterhead was misleading. In addition, Respondent failed to cooperate with the State Bar in its investigation of these matters.

ERs 5.5(a), and 8.4(a), (c) and (d), and SCRs 31(a)(3), 51(e), (f) and (k), and 63.

N/A

Agreement for 90 day Suspension (retroactive)

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (c) and (d);

In mitigation:

9.32(e) and (l).

Mental State: Negligent

Injury was not specifically discussed but it appears there was potential injury.

Oakley, J. J.

06/02/03

DC No. 01-1300

SB-03-0032-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent represented a corporation in a lawsuit in 1998 and in November 2000, Respondent contacted the client and advised that he would no longer be practicing law as of January 2001. The client insisted that Respondent find an attorney who would continue representation on a contingency basis. In mid-December 2000, Respondent informed the client that he was still looking for a substitute attorney. Thereafter, the client was unable to contact Respondent despite a number of letters and e-mail messages, none of which were returned as undeliverable. Upon termination of the representation, Respondent failed to return the client’s files and failed to provide an accounting of his fees, despite being requested to do so. Respondent also failed to cooperate with the State Bar in its investigation of the charge.

ERs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.16(b) and (d), 3.2, 8.1(b), 8.4(d), and SCRs 51(h) and (i).

1 year Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP/

Professionalism Course) upon reinstatement and Restitution

View Report

1 year Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP/

Professionalism Course) upon reinstatement and Restitution

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(a) (e) and (i);

No mitigating factors.

Mental State: Knowing

Actual injury

Pozgay, Jon R.

08/13/03

DC Nos. 00-0016, 01-0611

SB-03-0097-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent knowingly submitted a false and inflated fee affidavit to an arbitrator and the court in an effort to increase the fee award over the amount actually billed to the client with the intention of keeping that amount for himself. In addition, Respondent knowingly converted client funds, commingled personal funds, failed to maintain required client trust account records, failed to properly protect and maintain client funds that were in dispute and failed to comply with an obligation created pursuant to a judgment from a tribunal when no valid objection existed. Respondent engaged in conduct that was dishonest, fraudulent and prejudicial to the administration of justice. Respondent further failed to provide a timely response to the State Bar.

ERs 1.15(a), (b) and (c), 3.3(a)(1), 3.4(c), 8.4(c) and (d), and SCRs 43, 44 and 51(e), and (k).

4 years Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP/TAEEP) and Restitution

View Report

4 years Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP/TAEEP/

submit mental health treatment plan and progress/Professionalism Course) and Restitution

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(b) (c) (d) (g) (i) and (j);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (c) and (g).

Mental State: Knowing

Actual and potential injury.

Rose, Meryl D.

02/19/03

DC. No. 00-1408

SB-03-0003-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent was appointed as trustee for her brother’s trust funds. Between 1995 and 1998, Respondent and her husband misappropriated funds totaling approximately $103,000. Respondent pled guilty to the Class 3 felony of theft and was sentenced to five years of probation, 500 hours of community service and was fined $2,500.00. Respondent successfully completed the community service, made full restitution and paid the fine. Respondent’s probation officer petitioned the court for early termination of her probation.

ER 8.4 and SCR 51(a).

N/A

Agreement for 3 years Suspension (retroactive) and 1 year of Probation (MAP with PM)

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(b);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (c) (e) (g) (i) (k) and (l).

Mental State: Intentional

Actual injury

Saidel, Scott F.

10/29/03

DC No. 01-2324

SB-03-0123-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent pled guilty to two counts of endangerment, a Class 6 non-dangerous felony, for driving in excess of the speed limit causing significant and serious injuries to two passengers in Respondent’s car.

ERs 8.4(b) and (d), and SCR 51(a).

N/A

Agreement for 6 months Suspension (retroactive) and 1 year of Probation (MAP) upon reinstatement

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

No factors in aggravation;

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (b) (k) and (l).

Mental State: Knowing

Serious injury

Sammons, Randall M.

12/29/03

DC Nos. 01-0065-D et al.

SB-03-0150-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to diligently represent and adequately communicate with his clients. In another matter, while acting as a conservator, Respondent failed to take appropriate steps to manage the financial affairs of a conservatorship and engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.

ERs 1.3, 1.4, 1.15, 8.4(d), and SCR 51(k).

N/A

Agreement for Censure and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP/MAP)

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(c) (d) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (b) (e) (g) and (l).

Mental State: Negligent

Actual injury

Schwartz, Kevin

06/13/03

DC Nos. 01-0867, 01-0935

SB-03-0078-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to promptly render a full accounting regarding settlement proceeds to a third party medical lien holder and failed to promptly pay that third party lien holder. The failure to promptly pay the third party lien holder was due largely to Respondent’s mistaken belief that he could not do so while the matter was pending with the Bar.

ER 1.15.

N/A

Agreement for Censure

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) (e) (l) and (m).

Mental State: Negligent

Potential injury

Sirlin, Randi S.

10/30/03

DC Nos. 01-1968 et al.

SB-03-0125-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to properly represent her clients and adequately communicate with them about the status of their cases. Respondent also failed to take adequate measures to ensure proper maintenance of her trust account, failed to maintain individual client ledgers and failed to conduct monthly reconciliations of her trust account.

ERs 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.15, 3.2 and 8.4, 8.4(a) and (d), and SCRs 43 and 44.

N/A

Agreement for 6 months Suspension (retroactive) and 2 years of Probation (MAP/LOMAP/Fee Arbitration)

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(c) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (b) (d) (e) (i) (l) and interim rehabilitation.

Mental State: Knows or should have known

Actual injury

Self reported and self admitted for treatment.

Skivington, Steve T.

02/24/03

DC Nos. 97-2401 et al.

SB-03-0001-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to pay medical providers in a timely manner, failed to communicate with his clients in a timely manner, converted client’s settlement monies for his own use, and failed to perform services he was paid for.

ERs 1.4, 1.5, 1.15, 8.4(c) and SCRs 43, 44, 51(e)and (k).

N/A

Agreement for 4 years Suspension (retroactive) and 1 year of Probation (MAP) and (LOMAP if return to private practice in AZ)

View Report

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22 (a) (d) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32 (c) (d) (g) (i) and (l).

Mental State: Knowing

Injury not specifically addressed.

Stevens, Laurence B.

12/29/03

DC Nos. 01-2377 et al.

SB-03-0148-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to diligently represent his clients, failed to adequately communicate with his clients, engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and failed to promptly respond to the State Bar’s inquiries and requests in these files.

ERs 1.3, 1.4, 8.4(d), and SCR 51(h).

N/A

Agreement for Censure and Probation extended (LOMAP)

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (c) (d) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b).

Mental State: Negligent Injury was not specifically discussed.

Stigler, Tracy D.

02/20/03

DC Nos. 01-2000

SB-03-0013-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent relocated to California and failed to inform his clients of the move. Respondent failed to maintain adequate communication with his clients, failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing his clients, failed to abide by the clients’ directions concerning the representation and failed to cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation.

ER 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 8.1(b), and SCRs 51(h) and (i).

N/A

Agreement for Censure and 1 year of Probation (EEP) and Restitution

View Report

No discretionary review.

View Order

In aggravation:

9.22(c) and (d);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (e) and (l).

Mental State: Negligent

Actual injury

Susman, Alan H.

01/23/03

DC No. 01-1455

SB-03-0005-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent entered into business transactions (three loans) with a client. Respondent did not advise the client to seek advice of independent counsel and one transaction was not in writing.

ER 1.8(a) and 8.4(a).

N/A

Agreement for Censure and Restitution

No discretionary review.

In aggravation:

9.22 (b) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32 (a) (c) (e) (g) and (l).

Mental State: Negligent

Actual injury

Taraska, Michael T.

09/11/03

DC No. 95-1872

SB-03-0111-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent represented a businessman and a limited liability company in return for a minority interest in the LLC, which had been established to operate an adult club. Shortly thereafter, Respondent obtained a minority interest in the LLC and prepared and signed agreements between the LLC and a former client. In addition, Respondent filed lawsuits against four of his clients, three of whom were former clients. Respondent’s misconduct included, among other violations, misleading clients, filing frivolous lawsuits or claims, disobeying court orders, threatening an attorney, contacting represented parties, providing false or misleading information to various courts and engaging in a conflict of interest that required his disqualification as attorney for the LLC. Respondent’s conduct during litigation involving the LLC was the subject of state and federal court proceedings that resulted in findings of improper conduct and the imposition of sanctions. Respondent’s failure to obey court orders also led to a state court conviction for criminal contempt.

ERs 1.6, 1.7, 1.7(b), 1.8, 1.9, 3.1, 3.3, 3.4(c), 4.1, 4.1(a), 4.2, 4.4 and 8.4(b), (c) and (d), and SCRs 51(e) and (k).

Disbarment and Payment of Sanctions prior to reinstatement

Disbarment and Payment of Sanctions prior to reinstatement

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

In aggravation:

9.22(b) (c) (d) (g) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (e) (j) and (k).

Mental State: Intentional and knowing

Actual and potential injury

Turley, Mark E.

03/21/03

DC No. 00-0608

SB-03-0017-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent violated the terms of his probation in SB-02-0042-D by failing to timely contact LOMAP and MAP.

SCRs 51(f) and (j).

1 year Suspension and 2 years of Probation upon reinstatement (with terms and conditions to be determined at that time)

1 year Suspension and 2 years of Probation upon reinstatement (with terms and conditions to be determined at that time)

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

Probation Violation; noncompliance with terms of probation. In aggravation:

9.22(b) (c) (d) and (g);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (e) (i) and (k).

Mental State: Knowing

Actual injury to the legal system

Turnage, Dennis P.

04/23/03

DC Nos. 00-0763 et al.

SB-03-0025-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent’s most serious misconduct in the 12 count Complaint involved the conversion of client funds withheld from settlement for the purpose of paying lien holders.

Respondent also engaged in a pattern of neglect with respect to client matters and failed to respond or cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation.

ERs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.15, 1.16(d), 4.1, 8.1, 8.1(b), 8.4(c) and (d) and SCRs 43, 44, 51(h) and (i), and 63.

Disbarment and Restitution

Disbarment and Restitution

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (i) and (j).

No factors in mitigation.

Mental State: Knowing

Actual and potentially serious injury

Vice, George, III.

12/23/03

DC No. 01-2329

SB-03-0121-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent, while suspended, knowingly misrepresented his ability to practice law while suspended. Respondent maintained a website advertising the law offices of George Vice, III. The website contained certain legal forms that could be downloaded from the site, which were copyright protected by Respondent.

ERs 5.5(a), 7.1(a), 7.5(a) and 8.4(c).

Disbarment

Censure

No discretionary review.

Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(a) (g) and (i);

No factors in mitigation.

Mental State: Knowing

Potential injury

Weidner, Robert P.

03/20/03

DC No. 01-0934

SB-03-0016-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent’s most serious misconduct involved his failure to diligently pursue litigation on behalf of his client and failure to adequately communicate with his client. Thereafter, Respondent failed to provide the company with its file so it could retain substitute counsel. Respondent also failed to respond or cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation of this matter.

ERs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.15, 1.16(d), 8.1(b) and SCRs 51(h) and (i) and 63.

1.26 months and 1 day Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP) upon reinstatement and Restitution

6 months and 1 day Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP) upon reinstatement and Restitution

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(e) and (i)

No factors in mitigation.

Mental State: Knowing

Actual injury

Whitehead, Kenneth J.

07/01/03

DC Nos. 99-0550 et al.

SB-03-0076-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to diligently perform work on the clients’ behalf and failed to adequately communicate with the clients. Respondent also charged unreasonable fees, made misstatements to the State Bar during the screening investigation and failed to timely respond to requests for information. Respondent also failed to adequately supervise associate attorneys and non-lawyer assistants and also failed to timely refund unearned fees at the conclusion of the representation in several matters.

ERs 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.7, 1.15, 1.16(d), 5.1, 5.3, 8.1(a) and 8.4(c) and (d), and SCR 51(h).

N/A

Agreement for 9 months Suspension and 2 years of Probation (LOMAP and specific fee agreement terms and conditions) upon reinstatement and Restitution

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

In aggravation:

9.22(c) (d) and (f);

In mitigation:

9.32(a) (b) (e) and (l).

Mental State: Knows or should have known

Actual injury

Wittges, Timothy J.

10/29/03

DC No. 01-1535

SB-03-0126-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent failed to consult with a client and abide by the client’s decisions concerning the objectives of the representation and the means by which those objectives were to be accomplished; failed to exercise diligence in representing a client; failed to keep the client reasonably informed; failed to promptly comply with the client’s reasonable requests for information; and engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. Respondent also failed to respond or cooperate with the State Bar during its investigation.

ERs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 3.3, 8.1(b) and 8.4(d), and SCRs 51(h) and (i) and 63.

6 months and 1 day Suspension and Restitution

6 months and 1 day Suspension and Restitution

No discretionary or sua sponte review.

Conduct deemed admitted by default. In aggravation:

9.22(a) (c) (e) (h) and (i);

No factors in mitigation.

Mental State: Knowing

Actual injury

Younglove, Douglas S.

04/21/03

DC Nos. 00-0791 et al.

SB-03-0033-D

(By Judgment)

Respondent, in two instances, failed to promptly respond and cooperate with the State Bar’s inquiry and requests for information relevant to complaints filed against him.

SCRs 51(h) and (i).

N/A

Agreement for Censure and 1 year of Probation (LOMAP)

No discretionary review.

In aggravation:

9.22(a) (e) and (i);

In mitigation:

9.32(b) and (l).

Mental State: Negligent

Injury not specifically discussed.

Zakrajsek, Connie R.

07/02/03

DC Nos. 01-1776 et al.

SB-03-0100

(By Judgment)

Respondent engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in Arizona and filed numerous pro hac vice applications that contained material misrepresentations as to her standing in other courts or jurisdictions and the number of cases she was processing pro hac vice.

ERs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5(a), 1.16(d), 3.3(a), 5.5(a), 7.1, 7.5, 8.1 and 8.4(c).

Censure and Order prohibiting pro hac vice admission to any court in Arizona

Censure and Order prohibiting pro hac vice admission to any court in Arizona

No discretionary review.

Non-Member.

Aggravating and mitigating factors are not discussed.

Mental State was not specifically discussed but it appears it was knowing.

Actual injury

If member, disbarment would have been an appropriate sanction.