Facts

Ira David Hazelkorn, a California attorney practicing criminal defense, appeared in the Antelope Judicial District Municipal Court on October 5, 1989 to represent a client in a misdemeanor matter. At the time, he was suspended for nonpayment of State Bar dues. When questioned in open court about his status, he stated that his “records show” his dues had been paid. Documentary evidence later confirmed he paid and was reinstated the same day, though the precise time—before or after the appearance—was unknown.

The Office of Trials filed a Notice to Show Cause alleging willful appearance while suspended, in violation of Business and Professions Code §§ 6106, 6125, 6126, and 6127(b). Hazelkorn failed to respond, and his default was entered, admitting all factual allegations. The hearing judge, however, dismissed the case, finding that the State Bar’s own evidence undermined its charges. The examiner sought review.

Charges and Proceedings

The Review Department held that ambiguous evidence consistent with the allegations does not negate deemed admissions in a default proceeding. Because the record did not prove that Hazelkorn paid dues before his appearance, the admissions stood, and he was found culpable under §§ 6125 and 6126 for practicing law while suspended.

Sanctions Table

Result and Significance

The Review Department reversed the dismissal and held Hazelkorn culpable of practicing law while suspended. The matter was remanded for discipline. The case underscores that default admissions cannot be undone by ambiguous or self-serving evidence and clarifies that § 6127(b) does not apply to suspended members. It also reaffirms that uncharged misconduct may not be used in aggravation in default proceedings.

Tags