In Texas your attorney could be a convicted felon- and you may not know about it. Attorneys in Texas can snort drugs, flee from police, even offer to trade their legal services for sex, and still keep their Texas State Bar law license. Those are some of the findings of the KHOU-TV 11 News I-Team after analyzing records from various criminal courts along with documents from the Texas State Bar.
Watch HALT executive director Rodd Santomauro comment on this in his interview with KHOU in Houston, Texas: BAD LAWYERS IN TEXAS
'Dirty Tricks' Lawyers Targeted in Ethics Complaint
Posted 11:20PM 02/25/11 Posted under: Company News, Columns, Media
StopTheChamber.com, a critic of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and one of the targets of a planned Hunton & Williams dirty tricks campaign, is striking back. See Dirty Tricks
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John R. Call, State Bar #166415, Whittier (June 13, 2011). Call, 65, was disbarred for failing to comply with conditions to a previous order of discipline and failing to comply with rule 9.20 of the Rules of Court.
In February 2010 Call was suspended for two years and placed on four years of probation after being found culpable of 35 counts of attorney misconduct in ten client matters by failing to competently perform legal services, failing to return unearned fees, failing to promptly respond to clients’ status inquiries, failing to keep a client informed about significant developments in the client’s case, improperly withdrawing from representation, and failing to cooperate with nine State Bar investigations. He was also ordered to make restitution of $16,350 to six clients and to provide proof of his rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and ability in the law.
Call failed to comply with the disciplinary conditions by failing to submit quarterly probation reports for the last three quarters of 2010, failing to submit a psychiatric report by March 2010, failing to schedule a meeting with his probation deputy, and failing to notify clients and opposing counsel of his suspension within 30 days and to file an affidavit of compliance within 40 days.
In aggravation, Call had a record of prior discipline, the underlying matter. In mitigation, he admitted to the allegations and entered into a stipulation with the State Bar.
The order took effect July 13, 2011 REPORTED IN CALIFORNIA MAGAZINE JUNE 2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David I. Abrams, State
Bar #133545, Encino (October 19, 2011). Abrams, 54, was disbarred for
failing to maintain client funds in trust and engaging in acts of
moral turpitude, dishonesty, or corruption.
In October 2004 Abrams represented a client in a marital dissolution. The house owned by the client and her husband had been sold in July 2004 and the proceeds from the sale, $299,435, were deposited into a client trust account maintained by the client’s prior attorney. In April 2005 the court ordered the prior attorney to transfer the funds to Abrams’s client trust account and ordered Abrams to disburse $27,598 to the Los Angeles Department of Child Support Services by check made payable to the court trustee. The prior attorney sent the funds to Abrams and the funds were deposited into Abrams’s client trust account in June 2005.
Between July 2005 and March 2006 Abrams misappropriated approximately $44,436 from the client trust account, failed to pay out funds belonging to the client and her former husband, and failed to maintain $271,974 in trust.
In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, Abrams had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1988. He cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings. During the period of misconduct, he suffered from bipolar disorder, experienced extreme financial difficulties, and became alienated from his family and relatives due to his medical condition. Also, he presented evidence of his community service and volunteer work. The order took effect November 18, 2011. REPORTED IN CALIFORNIA MAGAZINE JUNE 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In October 2004 Abrams represented a client in a marital dissolution. The house owned by the client and her husband had been sold in July 2004 and the proceeds from the sale, $299,435, were deposited into a client trust account maintained by the client’s prior attorney. In April 2005 the court ordered the prior attorney to transfer the funds to Abrams’s client trust account and ordered Abrams to disburse $27,598 to the Los Angeles Department of Child Support Services by check made payable to the court trustee. The prior attorney sent the funds to Abrams and the funds were deposited into Abrams’s client trust account in June 2005.
Between July 2005 and March 2006 Abrams misappropriated approximately $44,436 from the client trust account, failed to pay out funds belonging to the client and her former husband, and failed to maintain $271,974 in trust.
In aggravation, the misconduct involved multiple acts of wrongdoing. In mitigation, Abrams had no record of prior discipline since being admitted to the bar in 1988. He cooperated with the State Bar during its investigation and proceedings. During the period of misconduct, he suffered from bipolar disorder, experienced extreme financial difficulties, and became alienated from his family and relatives due to his medical condition. Also, he presented evidence of his community service and volunteer work. The order took effect November 18, 2011. REPORTED IN CALIFORNIA MAGAZINE JUNE 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Erin H. Humphries, State
Bar #110669, Anaheim (October 19, 2011). Humphries, 67, was disbarred
for failing to comply with rule 9.20 of the Rules of Court.
In
February 2010 Humphries was suspended for 30 days and was to have
remained suspended until the State Bar Court granted a motion
terminating the suspension. She was disciplined for engaging in the
unauthorized practice of law, communicating with a represented party,
and engaging in acts of moral turpitude, dishonesty, or corruption.
Conditions to the discipline required Humphries to notify clients and
opposing counsel of her suspension within 30 days and to file an
affidavit of compliance within 40 days. She failed to file the affidavit
and provided no explanation to the State Bar. In aggravation,
Humphries had a record of prior discipline, the underlying matter. In
the current discipline, she demonstrated indifference toward
rectification of or atonement for the consequences of her misconduct,
and she failed to participate in the State Bar proceedings prior to
entry of her default.
The order took effect November 18, 2011 REPORTED IN CALIFORNIA MAGAZINE JUNE 2012
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The order took effect November 18, 2011 REPORTED IN CALIFORNIA MAGAZINE JUNE 2012
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOUR YEAR SUSPENSION FOR EX-DEPUTY DA UPHELD
California Bar Journal, March 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Three more lawyers prohibited from practice due to loan modification activities.
California Bar Journal, July 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HORRIBLE LAWYERS!!! I had an excellent disability case & they screwed it up, this lousy law firm worked on my case for over a year, and never contacted the social security office
Pissed client posted his experience on COMPLAINT BOARD on 3/8/12 about his lawyers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Binder & Binder are cons! screwed me big time!
"They didn't file my SSDisability which is why i hired them..."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HERE IS ANOTHER LOUSY AND LAZY LAWYER:
Attorney Alan Tajer charged 3500 dollars
for loan modification services . He knew it was against the law but he
did it again . It is a federal and State crime .
Many complaints have been filed with
the FBI, US Attorney General, CA Attorney General , CA Bar Association,
FTC, Both of my senators and congresswoman , BBB and Los Angeles
district Attorney .
He is still practicing law , he is
not returning any moneys . Many people lost their homes because of his
non existent loan modification services . May 27, 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOOK WHAT THIS ONE DID:
Attorney charged with theft from client goes on trial
An Encinitas attorney
charged with taking money from his brain-damaged client is scheduled to
go on trial in San Diego Sept. 28. Jeffrey Michael Brown [#137983]
pleaded not guilty last month to one count of grand theft and three
counts of passing worthless checks. The State Bar also is investigating
whether he misappropriated settlement funds from Kerry Powers, a
client who was severely injured in a 1993 automobile accident in
Oceanside.
Bar deputy trial counsel
Russell Weiner said if the 36-year-old Brown is convicted, he will be
placed on interim suspension by the bar and could eventually be
summarily disbarred. An attorney faces summary disbarment if convicted
of a felony involving moral turpitude.
If convicted, Brown could be sentenced to three years in prison on the
grand theft charge and an additional eight months on each of the check
charges, if they are ruled separate offenses.
Powers was severely damaged when the driver of a car in which she
was a passenger lost control of the vehicle and crashed. She was not
expected to live and was in a coma for two and a half months. Now 28,
she is in a wheelchair, and has continuing speech, eye, hand and leg
injuries requiring physical therapy and surgery.
Powers retained Brown to file a workers' compensation claim on her
behalf, as well as a third party claim against her employer, the driver
and Mitsubishi.
Brown took the case on a contingency basis and was to receive one-third of any recovery.
Powers received $250,000 in workers' compensation, which was paid directly to her mother on her behalf.
Brown settled the third party claim and in 1995 received $165,000
from Powers' employer and the driver. (Mitsubishi was dismissed from
the suit.) Under the terms of the settlement, the bar believes Brown
was to receive one-third of the funds for fees and/or costs, he was to
reimburse Medi-cal with one-third, and Powers was to receive the
balance of $52,000.
He withheld the
Medi-cal lien pending resolution of Powers' workers' comp matter;
eventually that lien was paid from the workers' comp award. Bar
investigator Sheila Campbell said it appears that the amount withheld
from the settlement funds for the Medi-cal payment should then have
gone to Powers, but she never received the money.
Brown wrote Powers a check for $50,000 in 1997, but it was returned
by the bank more than once because of insufficient funds. A $10,000
check he gave her in September 1998 was written on a closed account and
an $11,500 check written the following month bounced.
As a result of Brown's failure to pay Powers the money she was owed,
she was unable to receive some medical treatment she required, Weiner
said.
Powers eventually filed a claim
with the bar's Client Security Fund, which compensates clients up to
$50,000 for losses due to lawyers' dishonest conduct, and received the
maximum of $50,000.
Although the
Client Security Fund generally does not compensate clients until
discipline has been imposed on an attorney, Brown admitted to a San
Diego television station that he took Powers' money and spent it on law
firm expenses.
"The money ended up
being used by the law firm . . . for various things, which should not
have happened," Brown told KGTV-ABC. "I'm sorry it all happened and I'm
trying to do what I can to fix the situation."
Once the bar saw the videotape, it acted quickly to compensate Powers financially.
Brown has a prior record of discipline. In 1998, he was placed on
two years of probation and given a one-year stayed suspension as a
result of commingling personal and client funds in his client trust
account, and writing 30 bad checks on the same account.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOOK WHAT THIS LOUSY AND LAZY LAWYER DID:
Attorney ANDRE F. ZEEHANDELAAR , 52, of San Diego was disbarred July 3, 1999, and ordered to comply with rule 955 of the California Rules of Court.
Zeehandelaar
was charged with misconduct in six client matters and was found by the
State Bar Court to have committed 27 ethical violations, including five
counts of moral turpitude, one count of misappropriation of client
funds and abandonment of several clients.
Two
clients won malpractice judgments against him; five lost either their
causes of action or personal property or assets because of his actions.
He also filed a bad faith bankruptcy petition to avoid collection of
damages by one client.
In a divorce case,
the court ordered a county marshal to remove Zeehande-laar's client's
husband from the family home after he collected his belongings. The
same day, Zeehandelaar impersonated a marshal and denied the husband
access to the home. He told the husband's attorney that he had hired a
locksmith to open the residence and the husband's home office, where he
worked as an engineer. Zeehandelaar also said he would sell the man's
computer equipment unless he received $3,000 in attorney's fees.
He
subsequently disobeyed three more court orders that the husband be
permitted to retrieve his personal belongings and computer equipment.
The court eventually entered sanctions of $6,500 against Zeehandelaar
which he never paid.
Zeehandelaar was
hired by another client to both handle a family law matter and to file a
personal injury claim. He never did either and as a result, the client
won a $254,718 malpractice judgment against him.
He
continuously told his client that he had filed the personal injury
claim; the bar court found that those misrepresentations amounted to
moral turpitude.
In the third matter,
Zeehandelaar was hired by a couple to represent their son in three
criminal matters. He convinced the man's mother to give him the pink
slip to her son's car as temporary collateral pending his billing.
The
couple then signed a retainer agreement with Zeehandelaar and paid him
$2,300 in advance fees. Zeehandelaar forged their son's name on the
pink slip and sold the car without their knowledge or consent.
He
later asked the couple for $1,500 to hire a psychiatrist for their son;
they paid, and the psychiatrist administered a one-hour test.
Zeehandelaar then took a private investigator, who shared his office,
to jail to visit the client.
He suggested the client hire the investigator. Instead, the client fired Zeehandelaar.
The
next day, Zeehandelaar asked the client's parents for - and they paid -
$2,500 to hire the private investigator, not knowing Zeehandelaar had
been fired.
After the court relieved him
as counsel in the case, the parents repeatedly and unsuccessfully
sought return of the car and a refund of unearned fees.
Zeehandelaar
also represented a retired, 70-year-old nurse who was hospitalized
with cancer. Because she was heavily medicated, she was disoriented and
confused.
The client thought she was dying
and asked Zeehandelaar to prepare her will. He prepared two wills,
claiming the first was invalid, and charged her $300 for each.
Several
months later, without the client's knowledge, Zeehandelaar hired
several people to clean her mobile home while she was hospitalized.
In
his fee statement, he charged $4,488.66 for eight people to clean her
home over a period of 151.5 hours. He also charged his $150-per-hour
fee to clean the home, as well as $20 an hour for his wife's services.
The
client also asked Zeehandelaar to obtain a domestic restraining order
against her daughter, with whom she had a difficult relationship. He
charged her $16,800 for this service.
He
also charged her $3,785 to have a walk-in shower and railing installed
in her home, as well as for other work she had not requested, including
retiling her bathroom, replacing the carpet and installing blinds.
(The
court dismissed this count because simply exceeding a client's wishes
does not constitute an act of moral turpitude, and Zeehandelaar did not
benefit from the improvements.)
Zeehandelaar
also deposited $25,000 of the client's funds into two CD accounts, and
did not return the money when she requested it. He misappropriated
more than $14,000 of that money.
When the
client sued him for fraud, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty and
malpractice, Zeehandelaar filed a bankruptcy petition; the bankruptcy
court found it was filed in bad faith and ordered sanctions of $2,750
to be paid the client.
He had filed four
bankruptcy petitions between 1986 and 1993 which were dismissed. The
client won a judgment of more than $80,000.
Zeehandelaar
has a prior record of discipline for similar offenses; he abandoned
two clients, failed to comply with a court order to pay sanctions, and
failed to cooperate with the bar's investigation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
READ WHAT HAPPENED TO 20 LOUSY & LAZY ATTORNEYS IN FLORIDA
Twenty Tampa Bay attorneys disciplined by Florida Supreme Court
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THIS LOUSY AND LAZY ATTORNEY IN OHIO HAD TWO WIVES.
An Ohio attorney has lost his license to practice for the next year after a ruling from the Supreme Court of Ohio.
Dennis DiMartino
was sanctioned after it was determined he lied on a marriage license
application in North Carolina saying he was not married. He then
entered into a bigamous marriage in that state before a divorce from
his first wife, from Ohio, had been finalized.
Court
justices issued a six-month suspension for this new infraction but then
reimposed a one-year punishment that had been put on hold earlier. It
had a provision DiMartino could not get into more trouble.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOOK WHAT THIS LOUSY AND LAZY LAWYER DID IN MONTANA
Attorney Alan Tajer charged 3500 dollars for loan modification services . He knew it was against the law but he did it again . It is a federal and State crime .
Many complaints have been filed with the FBI, US Attorney General, CA Attorney General , CA Bar Association, FTC, Both of my senators and congresswoman , BBB and Los Angeles district Attorney .
He is still practicing law , he is not returning any moneys . Many people lost their homes because of his non existent loan modification services . May 27, 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOOK WHAT THIS ONE DID:
|
Attorney ANDRE F. ZEEHANDELAAR , 52, of San Diego was disbarred July 3, 1999, and ordered to comply with rule 955 of the California Rules of Court.
Zeehandelaar was charged with misconduct in six client matters and was found by the State Bar Court to have committed 27 ethical violations, including five counts of moral turpitude, one count of misappropriation of client funds and abandonment of several clients.
Two clients won malpractice judgments against him; five lost either their causes of action or personal property or assets because of his actions. He also filed a bad faith bankruptcy petition to avoid collection of damages by one client.
In a divorce case, the court ordered a county marshal to remove Zeehande-laar's client's husband from the family home after he collected his belongings. The same day, Zeehandelaar impersonated a marshal and denied the husband access to the home. He told the husband's attorney that he had hired a locksmith to open the residence and the husband's home office, where he worked as an engineer. Zeehandelaar also said he would sell the man's computer equipment unless he received $3,000 in attorney's fees.
He subsequently disobeyed three more court orders that the husband be permitted to retrieve his personal belongings and computer equipment. The court eventually entered sanctions of $6,500 against Zeehandelaar which he never paid.
Zeehandelaar was hired by another client to both handle a family law matter and to file a personal injury claim. He never did either and as a result, the client won a $254,718 malpractice judgment against him.
He continuously told his client that he had filed the personal injury claim; the bar court found that those misrepresentations amounted to moral turpitude.
In the third matter, Zeehandelaar was hired by a couple to represent their son in three criminal matters. He convinced the man's mother to give him the pink slip to her son's car as temporary collateral pending his billing.
The couple then signed a retainer agreement with Zeehandelaar and paid him $2,300 in advance fees. Zeehandelaar forged their son's name on the pink slip and sold the car without their knowledge or consent.
He later asked the couple for $1,500 to hire a psychiatrist for their son; they paid, and the psychiatrist administered a one-hour test. Zeehandelaar then took a private investigator, who shared his office, to jail to visit the client.
He suggested the client hire the investigator. Instead, the client fired Zeehandelaar.
The next day, Zeehandelaar asked the client's parents for - and they paid - $2,500 to hire the private investigator, not knowing Zeehandelaar had been fired.
After the court relieved him as counsel in the case, the parents repeatedly and unsuccessfully sought return of the car and a refund of unearned fees.
Zeehandelaar also represented a retired, 70-year-old nurse who was hospitalized with cancer. Because she was heavily medicated, she was disoriented and confused.
The client thought she was dying and asked Zeehandelaar to prepare her will. He prepared two wills, claiming the first was invalid, and charged her $300 for each.
Several months later, without the client's knowledge, Zeehandelaar hired several people to clean her mobile home while she was hospitalized.
In his fee statement, he charged $4,488.66 for eight people to clean her home over a period of 151.5 hours. He also charged his $150-per-hour fee to clean the home, as well as $20 an hour for his wife's services.
The client also asked Zeehandelaar to obtain a domestic restraining order against her daughter, with whom she had a difficult relationship. He charged her $16,800 for this service.
He also charged her $3,785 to have a walk-in shower and railing installed in her home, as well as for other work she had not requested, including retiling her bathroom, replacing the carpet and installing blinds.
(The court dismissed this count because simply exceeding a client's wishes does not constitute an act of moral turpitude, and Zeehandelaar did not benefit from the improvements.)
Zeehandelaar also deposited $25,000 of the client's funds into two CD accounts, and did not return the money when she requested it. He misappropriated more than $14,000 of that money.
When the client sued him for fraud, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty and malpractice, Zeehandelaar filed a bankruptcy petition; the bankruptcy court found it was filed in bad faith and ordered sanctions of $2,750 to be paid the client.
He had filed four bankruptcy petitions between 1986 and 1993 which were dismissed. The client won a judgment of more than $80,000.
Zeehandelaar has a prior record of discipline for similar offenses; he abandoned two clients, failed to comply with a court order to pay sanctions, and failed to cooperate with the bar's investigation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
READ WHAT HAPPENED TO 20 LOUSY & LAZY ATTORNEYS IN FLORIDA
Twenty Tampa Bay attorneys disciplined by Florida Supreme Court
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THIS LOUSY AND LAZY ATTORNEY IN OHIO HAD TWO WIVES.
An Ohio attorney has lost his license to practice for the next year after a ruling from the Supreme Court of Ohio.
Dennis DiMartino
was sanctioned after it was determined he lied on a marriage license
application in North Carolina saying he was not married. He then
entered into a bigamous marriage in that state before a divorce from
his first wife, from Ohio, had been finalized.
Court
justices issued a six-month suspension for this new infraction but then
reimposed a one-year punishment that had been put on hold earlier. It
had a provision DiMartino could not get into more trouble.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOOK WHAT THIS LOUSY AND LAZY LAWYER DID IN MONTANA
No comments:
Post a Comment