State
Bar Court of California
Hearing
Department
STIPULATION
RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING
ACTUAL SUSPENSION
Case Number(s): 05-O-04811
In the Matter of: Arthur P. Orejudos, Bar # 188555, A
Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent)
Counsel For The State Bar: Robert Henderson, Bar # 173205
Counsel for Respondent: Jonathan Arons, Bar # 111257
Submitted to: Settlement Judge State Bar Court Clerk’s
Office San Francisco
Filed: March 20, 2008
<<not>> checked. PREVIOUS STIPULATION REJECTED
Note: All information required by this form and any
additional information which cannot be provided in the space provided, must be
set forth in an attachment to this stipulation under specific headings, e.g.,
"Facts," "Dismissals," "Conclusions of Law,"
"Supporting Authority," etc.
A. Parties' Acknowledgments:
1. Respondent is a member of the State Bar of California,
admitted June 5, 1997.
2. The parties agree to be bound by the factual
stipulations contained herein even if conclusions of law or disposition are
rejected or changed by the Supreme Court.
3. All investigations or proceedings listed by case
number in the caption of this stipulation are entirely resolved by this
stipulation and are deemed consolidated. Dismissed charge(s)/count(s) are
listed under "Dismissals." The stipulation consists of 10 pages, not
including the order.
4. A statement of acts or omissions acknowledged by
Respondent as cause or causes for discipline is included under
"Facts."
5. Conclusions of law, drawn from and specifically
referring to the facts are also included under "Conclusions of Law".
6. The parties must include supporting authority for the
recommended level of discipline under the heading "Supporting
Authority."
7. No more than 30 days prior to the filing of this stipulation,
Respondent has been advised in writing of any pending investigation/proceeding
not resolved by this stipulation, except for criminal investigations.
8. Payment of Disciplinary Costs-Respondent acknowledges
the provisions of Bus. & Prof. Code §§6086.10 & 6140.7. (Check one
option only):
checked.
until costs are paid in full, Respondent will remain actually suspended from
the practice of law unless relief is obtained per rule 284, Rules of Procedure.
<<not>>checked.
costs to be paid in equal amounts prior to February 1 for the following
membership years: (hardship, special circumstances or other good cause per rule
284, Rules of Procedure.)
<<not>>
checked. costs waived in part as set forth in a separate attachment entitled
"Partial Waiver of Costs".
<<not>>
checked. costs entirely waived.
B. Aggravating
Circumstances [for definition, see Standards for Attorney Sanctions for
Professional Misconduct, standard 1.2(b)]. Facts supporting aggravating
circumstances are required.
<<not>>checked. (1) Prior record of discipline [see
standard 1.2(f)]
<<not>> checked. (a) State
Bar Court case # of prior case
<<not>>checked. (b) Date
prior discipline effective
<<not>>checked. (c) Rules
of Professional Conduct/ State Bar Act violations:
<<not>>checked. (d) Degree
of prior discipline
<<not>>checked. (e) If
Respondent has two or more incidents of prior discipline, use space provided
below.
<<not>> checked. (2) Dishonesty: Respondent's misconduct
was surrounded by or followed by bad faith, dishonesty, concealment,
overreaching or other violations of the State Bar Act or Rules of Professional
Conduct.
<<not>>checked. (3) Trust Violation: Trust funds or
property were involved and Respondent refused or was unable to account to the
client or person who was the object of the misconduct for improper conduct
toward said funds or property.
<<not>>checked. (4) Harm: Respondent's misconduct harmed
significantly a client, the public or the administration of justice.
<<not>> checked. (5) Indifference: Respondent demonstrated
indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his
or her misconduct.
<<not>> checked. (6) Lack of Cooperation: Respondent
displayed a lack of candor and cooperation to victims of his/her misconduct or
to the State Bar during disciplinary investigation or proceedings.
<<not>>checked. (7) Multiple/Pattern of Misconduct:
Respondent's current misconduct evidences multiple acts of wrongdoing or
demonstrates a pattern of misconduct.
checked. (8) No aggravating circumstances are involved.
Additional aggravating circumstances:
C. Mitigating Circumstances [see standard 1.2(e)]. Facts supporting
mitigating circumstances are required.
<<not>>checked.
(1) No Prior Discipline: Respondent has no prior record of discipline over
many years of practice coupled with present misconduct which is not deemed
serious.
checked.
(2) No Harm: Respondent did not harm the client or person
who was the object of the misconduct.
<<not>>checked.
(3) Candor/Cooperation: Respondent displayed spontaneous candor and
cooperation with the victims of his/her misconduct and to the State Bar during
disciplinary investigation and proceedings.
<<not>>checked.
(4) Remorse: Respondent promptly took objective steps spontaneously
demonstrating remorse and recognition of the wrongdoing, which steps were
designed to timely atone for any consequences of his/her misconduct. See page
8.
<<not>>checked.
(5) Restitution: Respondent paid $ in restitution to her client without the
threat or force of disciplinary, civil or criminal proceedings.
<<not>>
checked. (6) Delay: These disciplinary proceedings were excessively
delayed. The delay is not attributable to Respondent and the delay prejudiced
him/her.
<<not>>
checked. (7) Good Faith: Respondent acted in good faith.
<<not>>checked.
(8) Emotional/Physical Difficulties: At the time of the stipulated act or
acts of professional misconduct Respondent suffered extreme emotional
difficulties or physical disabilities which expert testimony would establish
was directly responsible for the misconduct. The difficulties or disabilities
were not the product of any illegal conduct by the member, such as illegal drug
or substance abuse, and Respondent no longer suffers from such difficulties or
disabilities.
<<not>>checked.
(9) Severe Financial Stress: At the time of the misconduct, Respondent
suffered from severe financial stress which resulted from circumstances not
reasonably foreseeable or which were beyond his/her control and which were
directly responsible for the misconduct.
<<not>>checked.
(10) Family Problems: At the time of the misconduct, Respondent suffered
extreme difficulties in his/her personal life which were other than emotional
or physical in nature. In 2006, Respondent experienced family problems that
contributed to his stress.
<<not>>checked.
(11) Good Character: Respondent's good character is attested to by a wide
range of references in the legal and general communities who are aware of the
full extent of his/her misconduct.
<<not>>
checked. (12) Rehabilitation: Considerable time has passed since the acts of
professional misconduct occurred followed by convincing proof of subsequent
rehabilitation.
<<not>>
checked. (13) No mitigating circumstances are involved.
Additional
mitigating circumstances:
D.
Discipline:
checked. (1) Stayed Suspension:
checked.
(a) Respondent must be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one-year.
<<not>>
checked. i. and until Respondent shows proof satisfactory to the State Bar
Court of rehabilitation and present fitness to practice and present learning
and ability in the law pursuant to standard 1.4(c)(ii) Standards for Attorney
Sanctions for Professional Misconduct.
<<not>>
checked. ii. and until Respondent pays restitution as set forth in the Financial
Conditions form attached to this stipulation.
<<not>>
checked. iii. and until Respondent does the following: .
checked.
(b) The above-referenced suspension is stayed.
checked. (2) Probation: Respondent must be placed on probation for a
period of two-years, which will commence upon the effective date of the Supreme
Court order in this matter. (See rule 9.18, California Rules of Court.)
checked. (3) Actual Suspension:
checked.
(a) Respondent must be actually suspended from the practice of law in the State
of California for a period of 30 days.
<<not>>
checked. i. and until Respondent shows proof satisfactory to the State Bar
Court of rehabilitation and present fitness to practice and present learning
and ability in the law pursuant to standard 1.4(c)(ii), Standards for Attorney
Sanctions for Professional Misconduct
<<not>>
checked. ii. and until Respondent pays restitution as set forth in the
Financial Conditions form attached to this stipulation.
<<not>>
checked. iii. and until Respondent does the following:
E. Additional Conditions of Probation:
checked.
(1) If Respondent is actually suspended for two years or more,
he/she must remain actually suspended until he/she proves to the State Bar
Court his/her rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and ability in
the general law, pursuant to standard 1.4(c)(ii), Standards for Attorney
Sanctions for Professional Misconduct.
checked.
(2) During the probation period, Respondent must comply with the
provisions of the State Bar Act and Rules of Professional Conduct.
checked.
(3) Within ten (10) days of any change, Respondent must report
to the Membership Records Office of the State Bar and to the Office of
Probation of the State Bar of California ("Office of Probation"), all
changes of information, including current office address and telephone number,
or other address for State Bar purposes, as prescribed by section 6002.1 of the
Business and Professions Code.
checked.
(4) Within thirty (30) days from the effective date of
discipline, Respondent must contact the Office of Probation and schedule a
meeting with Respondent's assigned probation deputy to discuss these terms and
conditions of probation. Upon the direction of the Office of Probation,
Respondent must meet with the probation deputy either in-person or by
telephone. During the period of probation, Respondent must promptly meet with
the probation deputy as directed and upon request.
checked.
(5) Respondent must submit written quarterly reports to the
Office of Probation on each January 10,
April 10, July 10, and October 10 of the period of probation. Under penalty of perjury, Respondent must
state whether Respondent has complied with the State Bar Act, the Rules of
Professional Conduct, and all conditions of probation during the preceding
calendar quarter. Respondent must also state whether there are any proceedings
pending against him or her in the State Bar Court and if so, the case number
and current status of that proceeding. If the first report would cover less
than 30 days, that report must be submitted on the next quarter date, and cover
the extended period.
In addition to all quarterly reports, a final report, containing the same
information, is due no earlier than twenty (20) days before the last day of the
period of probation and no later than the last day of probation.
<<not>>
checked. (6) Respondent must be assigned a probation monitor. Respondent must
promptly review the terms and conditions of probation with the probation
monitor to establish a manner and schedule of compliance. During the period of
probation, Respondent must furnish to the monitor such reports as may be
requested, in addition to the quarterly reports required to be submitted to the
Office of Probation. Respondent must cooperate fully with the probation monitor.
checked.
(7) Subject to assertion of applicable privileges, Respondent
must answer fully, promptly and truthfully any inquiries of the Office of
Probation and any probation monitor assigned under these conditions which are
directed to Respondent personally or in writing relating to whether Respondent
is complying or has complied with the probation conditions.
checked.
(8) Within one (1) year of the effective date of the discipline
herein, Respondent must provide to the Office of Probation satisfactory proof
of attendance at a session of the Ethics School, and passage of the test given
at the end of that session.
<<not checked>> No Ethics School recommended. Reason:
<<not>>
checked. (9) Respondent must comply with all conditions of probation imposed in
the underlying criminal matter and must so declare under penalty of perjury in
conjunction with any quarterly report to be filed with the Office of Probation.
<<not>>checked.
(10) The following conditions are attached hereto and incorporated:
<<not>> checked. Substance
Abuse Conditions.
<<not>>checked. Law Office
Management Conditions.
<<not>> checked. Medical
Conditions.
<<not>>checked. Financial
Conditions.
F. Other Conditions Negotiated by the Parties:
checked. (1) Multistate Professional Responsibility
Examination: Respondent must provide proof of passage of the Multistate
Professional Responsibility Examination ("MPRE"), administered by the
National Conference of Bar Examiners, to the Office of Probation during the
period of actual suspension or within one year, whichever period is longer.
Failure to pass the MPRE results in actual suspension without further hearing
until passage. But see rule 9.10(b), California Rules of Court, and rule 321
(a)(1) & (c), Rules of Procedure.
<<not>> checked. No MPRE recommended. Reason:
<<not>> checked. (2) Rule 9.20, California Rules of
Court: Respondent must comply with the requirements of rule 9.20, California
Rules of Court, and perform the acts specified in subdivisions (a) and (c) of
that rule within 30 and 40 calendar days, respectively, after the effective
date of the Supreme Court's Order in this matter.
checked. (3) Conditional Rule 9.20, California Rules of
Court: If Respondent remains actually suspended for 90 days or more, he/she
must comply with the requirements of rule 9.20, California Rules of Court, and
perform the acts specified in subdivisions (a) and (c) of that rule within 120
and 130 calendar days, respectively, after the effective date of the Supreme
Court's Order in this matter.
<<not>> checked. (4) Credit for Interim Suspension
[conviction referral cases only]: Respondent will be credited for the period
of his/her interim suspension toward the stipulated period of actual
suspension. Date of commencement of interim suspension:
<<not>> checked. (5) Other Conditions:
Attachment
language begins here (if any):
ATTACHMENT TO
STIPULATION
RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION
IN THE MATTER
OF: Arthur Orejudos
CASE NUMBER:
05-0-04811
FACTS.
In 2001,
respondent met a non-lawyer. The non-lawyer was a licensed Public Adjuster,
licensed to perform paralegal services for an attorney. In addition, prior to
meeting respondent, the non-lawyer had been a claims adjuster for the insurance
industry.
Subsequent to
meeting the non-lawyer, respondent and the non-lawyer entered into a business
relationship wherein the non-lawyer would be responsible for most of the
day-to-day work on personal injury matters. Specifically the non-lawyer was to
handle all paper-work and client contact.
After
respondent and the non-lawyer entered into the business relationship respondent
failed to supervise the non-lawyer. The non-lawyer would prepare all paperwork
on personal injury cases, negotiate the settlement and maintain all client
contact. Respondent eventually only signed and deposited the client’s
settlement funds into the client-trust account.
During the
business relationship between respondent and the non-lawyer the attorney’s fees
were divided between the respondent and non-lawyer.
The business
relationship between respondent and the non-lawyer ended in 2005.
To date, none
of respondent’s clients have complained regarding the services performed, nor
have there been any complaints regarding settlement funds.
CONCLUSIONS
OF LAW.
By permitting
a non-lawyer to render legal services directly to a client and negotiate with
the opposing party, without any supervision, respondent aided a person in the
Unauthorized Practice of Law and thereby respondent willfully violated
California Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 1-300(A).
By dividing
attorney’s fees with a non-lawyer, respondent willfully violated California
Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 1-320(A).
By failing to
supervise a non-lawyer in the work performed for clients, and by permitting the
non-lawyer to practice law, respondent intentionally and repeatedly failed to
supervise his employee and thereby failed to perform legal services with
competence in violation of California Rules of Professional Conduct, rule
3110(a).
By entering
into a business relationship with a non-lawyer wherein the non-lawyer would
practice law and by dividing the attorney’s fees from those matters with the
non-lawyer, respondent willfully committed an act of moral turpitude,
dishonesty and corruption in violation of Business and Professions Code section
6106.
PENDING
PROCEEDINGS.
The
disclosure date referred to, on page two, paragraph A.(7), was March 5, 2008.
COSTS OF
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.
Respondent
acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed respondent
that as of March 5, 2008, the costs in this matter are $1,983. Respondent
further acknowledges that should this stipulation be rejected or should relief
from the stipulation be granted, the costs in this matter may increase due to
the cost of further proceedings.
AUTHORITIES
SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.
Standard 2.3
- Culpability of a member of an act of moral turpitude, fraud, or intentional
dishonesty toward a court, client or another person or of concealment of a
material fact to a court, client or another person shall result in actual
suspension or disbarment depending upon the extent to which the victim of the
misconduct harmed or misled and depending upon the magnitude of the act of
misconduct and the degree to which it relates to the member’s acts within the
practice of law.
In the Matter
of Nelson (Review Dept. 1990) 1 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 178 - A six-month
actual suspension for forming a partnership with a non-attorney for the purpose
of practicing law, dividing attorney’s fees and using the non-attorney as a
runner and capper.
In the Matter
of Jones (Review Dept. 1993) 2 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 411 - A two-year actual
suspension for permitting a non-attorney to run a large scale personal injury
practice, which utilized runners and cappers.
MITIGATING
CIRCUMSTANCES.
FACTS
SUPPORTING MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES.
To date no
client of respondent’s has complained to the State Bar of California regarding
the handling of their matter, nor has any client complained about the handling
of their settlement funds.
STATE BAR
ETHICS SCHOOL.
Because
respondent has agreed to attend State Bar Ethics School as part of this
stipulation, respondent may receive Minimum Continuing Legal Education credit
upon the satisfactory completion of State Bar Ethics School.
RESTRICTIONS
WHILE ON ACTUAL SUSPENSION.
1. During the
period of actual suspension, respondent shall not:
a) Render
legal consultation or advice to a client;
b) Appear on
behalf of a client in any hearing or proceeding or before any judicial officer,
arbitrator, mediator, court, public agency, referee, magistrate, commissioner,
or hearing officer;
c) Appear as
a representative of a client at a deposition or other discovery matter;
d). Negotiate
or transact any matter for or on behalf of a client with third parties;
e) Receive,
disburse, or otherwise handle a client’s funds; or
f) Engage in
activities which constitute the practice of law.
2. Respondent
shall declare under penalty of perjury that he or she has complied with this
provision in any quarterly report required to be filed with the Probation Unit,
pertaining to periods in which the respondent was actually suspended from the
practice of law.
Respondent
admits that the above facts are true and that he is culpable of violations of
the specified statutes and/or Rules of Professional Conduct.
SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES
Case Number(s): 05-O-04811
In the Matter of: Arthur P. Orejudos
By their
signatures below, the parties and their counsel, as applicable, signify their
agreement with each of the recitation and each of the terms and conditions of this
Stipulation Re Facts, Conclusions of Law and Disposition.
Signed by:
Respondent: Arthur
P. Orejudos
Date: 3/13/2008
Respondent’s
Counsel: Jonathan I. Arons
Date: March
13, 2008
Deputy Trial
Counsel: Robert A. Henderson
Date: 3/17/08
ACTUAL
SUSPENSION ORDER
Case Number(s): 05-O-04811
In the Matter of: Arthur P. Orejudos
Finding the
stipulation to be fair to the parties and that it adequately protects the
public, IT IS ORDERED that the requested dismissal of counts/charges, if any is
GRANTED without prejudice, and:
checked.
The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED and the DISCIPLINE
RECOMMENDED to the Supreme Court.
<<not>>
checked. The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED AS MODIFIED as set
forth below, and the DISCIPLINE IS RECOMMENDED to the Supreme Court.
<<not>>
checked. All Hearing dates are vacated.
The parties
are bound by the stipulation as approved unless: 1) a motion to withdraw or
modify the stipulation, filed within 15 days after service of this order, is
granted; or 2) this court modifies or further modifies the approved
stipulation. (See rule 135(b), Rules of Procedure.) The effective date of this
disposition is the effective date of the Supreme Court order herein, normally
30 days after the file date. (See rule 9.18(a), California Rules of Court.)
Signed by:
Judge of the
State Bar Court: Lucy Armendariz
Date: March 19,
2008
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
[Rule 62(b), Rules Proc.; Code Civ.
Proc., § 1013a(4)]
I am a Case
Administrator of the State Bar Court of California. I am over the age of
eighteen and not a party to the within proceeding. Pursuant to standard court
practice, in the City and County of San Francisco, on March 20, 2008, I
deposited a true copy of the following document(s):
STIPULATION
RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING
in a sealed
envelope for collection and mailing on that date as follows:
checked.
by first-class mail, with postage thereon fully prepaid, through the United
States Postal Service at San Francisco, California, addressed as follows:
JONATHAN
IRWIN ARONS
LAW
OFC JONATHAN I ARONS
101
HOWARD ST #310
SAN
FRANCISCO, CA 94105
checked.
by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of
California addressed as follows:
ROBERT
HENDERSON, Enforcement, San Francisco
I hereby
certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in San Francisco,
California, on March 20, 2008.
Signed by:
Bernadette
C.O. Molina
Case
Administrator
State Bar
Court