Case Number(s): 07-PM-13676-RAP
In the Matter of: Mark Edward Madison, Bar # 158786, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Terrie Goldade, Bar # 155348
Counsel for Respondent: In Pro Per, Bar #
Submitted to: Assigned Judge – State Bar Court Clerk’s Office Los Angeles.
Filed: December 11, 2007
<<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.
1. Respondent is a member of the State Bar of California, admitted June 8, 1992.
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 9 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):
<<not>> checked. Costs are added to membership fee for calendar year following effective date of discipline (no actual suspension).
checked. Until costs are paid in full, Respondent will remain actually suspended from the practice of law unless relief is obtained per rule 5.130, Rules of Procedure (actual suspension).
<<not>> checked. Costs are to be paid in equal amounts prior to February 1 for the following membership years: . (Hardship, special circumstances or other good cause per rule 5.132, Rules of Procedure.) If Respondent fails to pay any installment as described above, or as may be modified by the State Bar Court, the remaining balance is due and payable immediately.
<<not>> checked. Costs are waived in part as set forth in a separate attachment entitled "Partial Waiver of Costs".
<<not>> checked. Costs are entirely waived.
Additional aggravating circumstances: .
In August 2007, Respondent’s father underwent surgery and one-third of his lung was removed. Respondent has participated, and continues to participate, in the care of his son, wife, and father.
Additional mitigating circumstances:
Attachment language (if any):
FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
Respondent admits that the following facts are true and that he is culpable of violations of the specified statute.
1. On July 5, 2006, Respondent executed a Stipulation re Facts, Conclusions of Law and Disposition with the State Bar in State Bar Court Case No. 05-0-01797 ("Stipulation"). The Hearing Department of the State Bar Court filed an order approving the Stipulation on July 28, 2006.
2. On November 15, 2006, the California Supreme Court filed an Order in Case No. S146415 (State Bar Court Case No. 05-0-01797) that Respondent be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year, that execution of suspension be stayed and that Respondent be placed on probation or a period of two years subject to the conditions of probation as recommended by the Hearing Department of the State Bar Court in its order approving the Stipulation filed on July 28, 2006. Respondent was ordered to comply with the following terms and conditions of probation, among others:
a. As a condition of probation, Respondent was ordered to contact the Office of Probation within 30 days from the effective date of discipline and schedule a meeting with his assigned probation deputy to discuss the terms and conditions of his probation. Respondent was late in doing so. He was to contact the Office of Probation on January 14, 2007, but did not do so until November 1, 2007.
b. As a condition of probation, Respondent was ordered to comply with the Rules of Professional Conduct and the State Bar Act and report such compliance quarterly under penalty of perjury ("quarterly report"). Respondent filed his first three quarterly reports late: his reports due April 10, 2007, July 10, 2007, and October 10, 2007 were filed on November 26, 2007.
c. As a condition of probation, Respondent was ordered to comply with the "Client Funds Certificate" condition. If Respondent possessed client funds at any time during the period covered by a required quarterly report, Respondent was required to file with each required report a certificate from a certified public account certifying specified conditions had been met or state under penalty of perjury that he did not possess any client funds, property or securities during the entire period covered by the report ("CPA report"). Respondent filed his first three CPA reports late: his reports due April 10, 2007, July 10, 2007, and October 10, 2007 were filed on November 21 , 2007.
3. On January 3, 2007, the Office of Probation mailed an initial letter to Respondent at his membership records address outlining the terms and condition of his probation. Respondent received the letter
4. On May 8, 2007, the Office of Probation mailed a letter to Respondent at his membership records address advising him that his first quarterly report was due April 10, 2007 but was not received. A copy of the initial letter dated January 3, 2007 was enclosed for Respondent’s reference. Respondent received the letter.
5. On April 13, 2007, the Office of Probation telephoned Respondent with the intent of discussing, among other things, his failure to submit his quarterly report due April 10, 2007 and his failure to contact me to schedule a meeting to discuss the terms and conditions of his probation. A message requesting a return call was left for Respondent.
6. On October 12, 2007, Respondent submitted CPA reports for April 10, 2007, July 10, 2007, and October 10, 2007. They could not be filed because they were defective. By failing to timely contact and schedule an initial meeting with the Office of Probation by January 14, 2007; by failing to timely file his Quarterly Reports due April 10, 2007, July 10, 2007, and October 10, 2007; and by failing to timely file his CPA reports due April 10, 2007, July 10, 2007, and October 10, 2007, Respondent wilfully violated Business and Professions Code, section 6068(k).
PENDING PROCEDURES.
The disclosure date referred to, on page one, paragraph A.(7) was November 19, 2007
COSTS OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.
Respondent acknowledges that the Office of Probation has informed respondent that as of November 19, 2007, the estimated prosecution costs in this matter are approximately $1,546. Respondent acknowledges that this figure is an estimate only and that it does not include State Bar Court costs which will be included in any final cost assessment. 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 2.6, subsection (a), states that culpability of a member of a violation of Business and Professions Code, section 6068(k), shall result in disbarment or suspension depending upon the gravity of the offense or the harm, if any, to the victim, with due regard to the purposes of imposing discipline set forth in standard 1.3.
An attorney who violated his probation by failing to timely complete restitution and by failing to timely attend Ethics School, received two years’ probation with a condition that the first 30 days he be actually suspended. In the Matter of Gorman (Review Dept. 2003) 4 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 567. Neither bad purpose nor intentional evil is required to establish willful violations of disciplinary probation. Id. at 572. An attorney’s cooperation in stipulating to facts warrants some mitigative consideration. Id. More serious sanctions are assigned to probation violations closely related to reasons for imposition of previous discipline or to rehabilitation. Id. at 573-574.
In this matter, Respondent’s underlying disciplinary violation was in relation to failing to maintain in trust $3,432 on behalf of his client Holly Richards. He failed to maintain a sufficient record which would have revealed the deposit and sum held on behalf of Richards. By failing to be aware of the funds held on behalf of Richards to reimburse an insurance company, Respondent subjected her to potential liability. Respondent also failed to promptly release Richards’ file. As part of his disciplinary probation, Respondent was ordered to meet with the Office of Probation, file quarterly reports, and file CPA reports. These disciplinary conditions were related to his original misconduct, important for his rehabilitation, and were intended to assist the State Bar in monitoring Respondent’s rehabilitation. However, in light of Respondent’s mitigation set forth above, the Office of Probation is willing to request suspension in relation to standard 2.6 based upon Respondent’s belated compliance, his stipulation to his violations, and his agreement to reinstate his probation.
OTHER CONDITIONS NEGOTIATED BY THE PARTIES.
The parties stipulate to waive any variance in the language, allegations, and conclusions of law between this stipulation and the Notice of Motion and Motion to Revoke Probation filed on September 17, 2007. Respondent acknowledges that this stipulation contains language, allegations, and conclusion of law which differ from the language, allegations, and conclusions of law contained in the Notice of Motion and Motion to Revoke Probation filed on September 17, 2007. The parties further stipulate to waive the right to have any amendment to the Notice of Motion and Motion to Revoke Probation.
SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES
Case Number(s): 07-PM-13676-RAP
In the Matter of: Mark Edward Madison
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: Mark Edward Madison
Date: November 26, 2007
Respondent’s Counsel:
Date:
Deputy Trial Counsel: Terrie Goldade
Date: November 26, 2007
Case Number(s): 07-PM-13676-RAP
In the Matter of: Mark Edward Madison
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: Richard A. Platel
Date: December 4, 2007
[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 Los Angeles, on December 11, 2007, 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 Los Angeles, California, addressed as follows:
MARK E. MADISON
1440 N HARBOR BLVD #900
FULLERTON, CA 92835
checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:
TERRIE GOLDADE, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, California, on December 11, 2007.
Signed by:
Johnnie Lee Smith
Case Administrator
State Bar Court