Facts

Smith Matter (Civil Trial Misconduct / Disobedience of Court Orders)

Respondent represented a plaintiff in a products case tried in San Francisco Superior Court. After a mistrial, the matter was set for retrial and bifurcated. The trial judge issued repeated rulings limiting what could be presented to the jury, including prohibitions on references to unrelated deaths or injuries and other prejudicial material. Despite these rulings, respondent made statements and posed questions that violated the court’s directives, including references to other ailments and deaths allegedly caused by the product. The judge found repeated prejudicial misconduct and declared mistrials. Sanctions exceeding $43,000 were imposed across proceedings, including contempt-based sanctions and Code of Civil Procedure section 128.5 sanctions for bad faith conduct.

Middleton Matter (Means Inconsistent with Truth / Wrongful Attack on Opposing Counsel)

Respondent sought a continuance in another matter while juggling trial obligations. In support of the continuance, respondent declared that he had been “ordered to be available” for Judicial Council proceedings relating to a judicial disqualification motion, but the record did not support that any such order or proceeding had been set. The hearing judge found the statement inaccurate. In the same matter, respondent’s associate advised the court the case was settled when it was not. Respondent later filed a declaration implying opposing counsel had misled the court regarding settlement. The Review Department concluded respondent bore responsibility for the misrepresentation and for grossly neglecting to investigate before accusing opposing counsel.

McKinley Matter (Medical Lien / Competence / Trust Accounting)

In a personal injury settlement, respondent distributed proceeds and collected fees but failed to timely satisfy a medical provider’s lien. The lien went unpaid for approximately 20 months and was resolved only after the medical provider sought State Bar assistance. The court treated the conduct as more than “technical,” noting reckless handling and trust-account implications tied to lien funds.

Client Trust Account Matter (Mismanagement / Negative Balances / Unexplained Transfers)

Respondent’s trust account reflected repeated management failures, including periods of negative balances while checks continued to issue, unexplained transfers from a general account into the trust account, and bank-debited payments of business/personal obligations from the trust account. Even where some debits stemmed from bank error, respondent was found culpable for failing to properly supervise and maintain the trust account, and for gross mismanagement amounting to moral turpitude.

Oei Matter (Falsification of Proofs of Service / Maintaining an Unjust Action)

In a medical malpractice action, respondent failed to prosecute the case meaningfully (including failure to timely disclose experts) yet attempted to keep the case alive. Six filed documents carried proofs of service bearing a former employee’s signature. Evidence supported a finding that respondent forged that employee’s signature on all six proofs and then made false representations about who signed them. When the case was dismissed, respondent refiled a substantially identical action. Sanctions were ordered, including sanctions against respondent for failure to obey court orders.

Giannini Matter (Overreaching a Disabled Client / Concealment / Trust Violations)

Respondent represented disabled clients under a contingent fee agreement and obtained relief including a $9,000 cash payment. Respondent decided unilaterally to keep the entire $9,000 as fees, did not promptly disclose receipt of the funds, and did not provide a timely accounting or settlement statement. Fee arbitration later awarded the clients most of the money. The court found willful trust-rule violations and moral turpitude based on concealment and overreaching.