Case Number(s): 08-O-11997
In the Matter of: Steven John Hanley, Bar # 133741, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Charles T. Calix, Bar # 146853,
Counsel for Respondent: in Pro Per, Bar #
Submitted to: Assigned Judge – State Bar Court Clerk’s Office San Francisco.
Filed: May 6, 2009.
<<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 16, 1988.
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):
checked. Costs are added to membership fee for calendar year following effective date of discipline (public reproval).
<<not>> checked. Case ineligible for costs (private reproval).
<<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.
9. The parties understand that:
<<not>> checked. (a) A private reproval imposed on a respondent as a result of a stipulation approved by the Court prior to initiation of a State Bar Court proceeding is part of the respondent’s official State Bar membership records, but is not disclosed in response to public inquiries and is not reported on the State Bar’s web page. The record of the proceeding in which such a private reproval was imposed is not available to the public except as part of the record of any subsequent proceeding in which it is introduced as evidence of a prior record of discipline under the Rules of Procedure of the State Bar.
<<not>> checked. (b) A private reproval imposed on a respondent after initiation of a State Bar Court proceeding is part of the respondent’s official State Bar Membership records, is disclosed in response to public inquiries and is reported as a record of public discipline on the State Bar’s web page.
checked. (c) A public reproval imposed on a respondent is publicly available as part of the respondent’s official State Bar membership records, is disclosed in response to public inquiries and is reported as a record of public discipline on the State Bar’s web page.
Within one (1) year of the effective date of the discipline herein, Respondent must submit to the Office of Probation satisfactory evidence of completion of no less than twenty-four (24) hours of MCLE approved courses in law office management, attorney client relations, and/or general legal ethics. This requirement is separate from any MCLE requirement, and Respondent will not receive MCLE credit for attending these courses as they are intended, in part, to take the place of taking and passing Ethics School and the MPRE (Rule 3201, Rules of Procedure of the State Bar).
IN THE MATTER OF: Steven John Hanley, State Bar No. 133741
STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 08-O-11997
Respondent admits that the following facts are true and that he is culpable of violations of the specified statutes and Rule of Professional Conduct.
FACTS.
1. On or about September 1, 2001, Respondent was suspended from the practice of law in the State of California for failing to pay his membership fees to the State Bar of California ("State Bar").
2. In or about January of 2004, Respondent was employed by a business entity named "Winkler Partners" located in Taipei, Taiwan, which is where he resided.
3. Respondent served as a legal consultant for Winkler Partners under a work permit issued by the government of Taiwan, which requires a law degree from a university, but does not require active membership in a bat- organization.
4. In or about January of 2004, the website for Winkler Partners, www.winklerpartners.com, stated, in part, that: "[Respondent] is a member of the State Bar of California."
5. Respondent permitted Winkler Partners to state on its website that he was a member of the State Bar without stating that he was not presently entitled to practice law in California.
6. On or about April 21,2004, Respondent paid his State Bar membership fees and was returned to active status.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
7. By permitting the website for Winkler Partners to advertise that he was a member of the State Bar without stating that he was not presently entitled to practice law in California, Respondent willfully caused a communication concerning his availability for professional employment to contain an untrue statement in violation of Rule 1-400(D)(1) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
PENDING PROCEEDINGS.
The disclosure date referred to, .on page one, paragraph A.(7), was on or about March 19, 2009.
COSTS OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.
Respondent acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed respondent that as of March 19, 2009, the prosecution costs in this matter are $1,983.00. 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 2.10 of the Standards Pertaining To Sanctions For Professional Misconduct Found Or Acknowledged In Original Disciplinary Proceedings states that
Culpability of a member of a violation of any provision of the Business and Professions Code not specified in these standards or of a willful violation of any Rule of Professional Conduct not specified in these standards shall result in reproval or suspension according to 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.
SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES
Case Number(s): 08-O-11997
In the Matter of: Steven John Hanley
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: Steven John Hanley
Date: April 8, 2009
Respondent’s Counsel:
Date:
Deputy Trial Counsel: Charles T. Calix
Date: April 10, 2009
Case Number(s): 08-O-11997
In the Matter of: Steven John Hanley
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 REPROVAL IMPOSED.
<<not>> checked. The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED AS MODIFIED as set forth below, and the REPROVAL IMPOSED.
<<not>> checked. All court dates in the Hearing Department 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 125(b), Rules of Procedure.) Otherwise the stipulation shall be effective 15 days after service of this order.
Failure to comply with any conditions attached to this reproval man constitute cause for a separate proceeding for willful breach of rule 1-110, Rules of Professional Conduct.
Signed by:
Judge of the State Bar Court: Pat McElroy
Date: May 6, 2009
by
REGULAR MAIL
CASE NUMBER(s): 08-O-11997
I, the undersigned, over the age of eighteen (18) years, whose business address and place of employment is the State Bar of California, 1149 South Hill Street, Los Angeles, California 90015, declare that I am not a party to the within action; that I am readily familiar with the State Bar of California’s practice for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service; that in the ordinary course of the State Bar of California’s practice, correspondence collected and processed by the State Bar of California would be deposited with the United States Postal Service that same day; that I am aware that on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date on the envelope or package is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing contained in the affidavit; and that in accordance with the practice of the State Bar of California for collection and processing of mail, I deposited or placed for collection and mailing in the City and County of Los Angeles, on the date shown below, a true copy of the within
STIPULATION RE: FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING PUBLIC REPROVAL
in a sealed envelope placed for collection and mailing as first class mail, at Los Angeles, on the date shown below, addressed to:
Steven J. Hanley
Winkler Partners
12f
#86, Chong Ching S Rd, Sec 1
Taipei 10045, TAIWAN
in an inter-office mail facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed to:
N/A
I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Los Angeles, California, on the date shown below.
DATED: April 10, 2009
SIGNED BY: Max Carranza
Declarant
[Rules Proc. of State Bar; Rule 5.27(B); 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 May 6, 2009, 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:
STEVEN J. HANLEY
WINKLER PARTNERS
12F
#86, CHONG CHING S RD, SEC 1
TAIPEI 10045, TAIWAN
checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:
CHARLES T. CALIX, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in San Francisco, California, on May 6, 2009.
Signed by:
Lauretta Cramer
Case Administrator
State Bar Court