State Bar Court of California

Hearing Department

STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING

ACTUAL SUSPENSION

Case Number(s): 09-O-12137

In the Matter of: William S. Bleecker, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent), Bar # 79787

Counsel For The State Bar: Susan I. Kagan, Bar # 214209

Counsel for Respondent: Bar #

Submitted to: Settlement Judge State Bar Court Clerk’s Office San Francisco

Filed: March 3, 2010

<<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 23, 1978.

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 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.

checked. (1) Prior record of discipline [see standard 1.2(f)]

 checked. (a)             State Bar Court case # of prior case 84-O-18464 [Supreme Court Case No. S017463]

 checked. (b)             Date prior discipline effective February 14, 1991

checked. (c)              Rules of Professional Conduct/ State Bar Act violations: Former RPC 8-101 (A) and B&P Code section 6106

checked. (d)              Degree of prior discipline February 14, 1991

<<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.

<<not>> checked. (2)    No Harm:  Respondent did not harm the client or person who was the object of the misconduct. 

 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. 

 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 $   on   in restitution to   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.

 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. Respondent has presented character letters from a variety of individuals in the community attesting to their respective faith in Respondent and his overall honesty. These character references expressed their belief in Respondent’s integrity even with the knowledge of the misconduct and believe that the conduct will not recur. (Std. 1.2(e)(vi).)

<<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 two (2) years.

<<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 three (3) 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 sixty (60) 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.

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.

 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.

<<not>> 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):

FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Facts

1. In 2002, respondent was hired by JC Cardillo ("Cardillo") to represent her in a marital dissolution matter. Thereafter, Cardillo was awarded a 1953 MG-TD ("automobile") in the marital dissolution matter. Prior to November 14, 2006, respondent took possession of the automobile on behalf of Cardillo.

2. At all relevant times herein, Cardillo was entitled to receive the automobile from respondent. On November 14, 2006, February 18, 2007, and November 5, 2007, Cardillo sent letters to respondent demanding return of the automobile. Respondent received the letters soon after they were sent but failed to return the automobile to Cardillo.

3. Respondent did not return the automobile to Cardillo until January 13, 2010, more than three years after she first demanded its return.

4. During his representation of Cardillo in the marital dissolution matter, respondent loaned Cardillo approximately $7,800 for various expenses including payment of Cardillo’s property taxes. At no time prior to loaning the $7,800 to Cardillo did respondent fully disclose and transmit the terms of the loan in writing to Cardillo in a manner which Cardillo should have understood. At no time prior to loaning the $7,800 to Cardillo did respondent advise Cardillo in writing that she could seek the advice of an independent lawyer of her choice. At no time prior to loaning the $7,800 to Cardillo did respondent give Cardillo a reasonable opportunity to seek the advice of an independent lawyer. At no time did Cardillo consent in writing to the terms of the loan.

5. Cardillo has not repaid any portion of the $7,800 to respondent and respondent has not sought repayment of the $7,800 from Cardillo.

Conclusions of Law

1. By failing to return the automobile in his possession to Cardillo until January 13, 2010, after he received letters from Cardillo demanding its return, respondent failed to deliver promptly, as requested by a client, any securities or other properties in respondent’s possession which the client is entitled to receive in wilful violation of rule 4-100(B)(4) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

2. By loaning $7,800 to his client, Cardillo, without transmitting the terms of the loan in writing to Cardillo in a manner which Cardillo should have understood, by loaning the $7,800 to Cardillo without advising Cardillo that she could seek an independent lawyer and without giving Cardillo the opportunity to seek an independent lawyer, and by loaning $7,800 to Cardillo without obtaining Cardillo’s informed written consent to the terms of the loan, respondent improperly entered into a business transaction with his client in wilful violation of rule 3-300 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

PENDING PROCEEDINGS

The disclosure date referred to on page two, paragraph A (7) was February 1, 2010.

FACTS SUPPORTING AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES

AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

Standard 1.2(b)(i). Respondent has one prior record of discipline.

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES

Standard 1.2(e)(v). Respondent displayed spontaneous candor and cooperation to the State Bar during the disciplinary proceedings.

Standard 1.2(e)(vii). Respondent displayed remorse for his misconduct.

SUPPORTING AUTHORITY

Standard 2.2(b) requires at least a three-month actual suspension for a violation of rule 4-100, irrespective of mitigating circumstances.

Standard 2.8 requires suspension for the wilful violation of rule 3-300, unless the extent of the member’s misconduct and the harm to the client are minimal, in which case, the degree of discipline shall be reproval.

Standard 1.7(a) provides that if a member is found culpable of professional misconduct in any proceeding which discipline may be imposed and the member has a record of one prior imposition of discipline as defined by standard 1.2(0, the degree of discipline imposed in the current proceeding shall be greater than that imposed in the prior proceeding unless the prior proceeding was so remote in time to the current proceeding and the offense for which it was imposed was so minimal in severity that imposing greater discipline in the current proceeding would be manifestly unjust.

Generally, a wilful violation of rule 4-100 results in an actual suspension. (See In the Matter of Koehler (Review Dept. 1991) 1 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 615 [six months’ actual suspension for wilful violation of former rule 8-101; prior record of discipline]; In the Matter of Doran (Review Dept. 1998) 3 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 871 [six months’ actual suspension for wilful violation of rule 4-100; no prior record of discipline]; In the Matter of Blum (Review Dept. 2002) 4 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 403 [30 days’ actual suspension for misconduct including wilful violation of rule 4-100; no prior record of discipline].)

Respondent’s misconduct in this matter is less egregious than the misconduct in the above-cited cases. Yet, the aggravation makes this case more serious than Blum. It should be noted, however, that respondent’s prior record of discipline, although serious, was imposed for misconduct which occurred more than 20 years before the misconduct in this matter. Although a violation of rule 4-100 generally results in more discipline than a 60-day actual suspension, given the particular facts of this case and the mitigation, a deviation from the standards is appropriate.

SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES

Case Number(s): 09-O-12137

In the Matter of: William S. Bleecker

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:  William S. Bleecker

Date: 2/10/10

Respondent’s Counsel:

Date:

Deputy Trial Counsel: Susan I. Kagan

Date: 2/16/10

ORDER

Case Number(s): 09-O-12137

In the Matter of: William S. Bleecker

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: Pat McElroy

Date: March 3, 2010

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 3, 2010, 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:

WILLIAM STORM BLEECKER

717 COLLEGE AVE 1FL

SANTA ROSA, CA  95404

 checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:

Susan I. Kagan, Enforcement San Francisco

I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in San Francisco, California, on March 3, 2010.

Signed by:

George Hue

Case Administrator

State Bar Court