Case Number(s): 09-O-12631, 09-O-17863
In the Matter of: Amy Maitrayee Ghosh, Bar # 201701, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Erin McKeown Joyce,
Deputy Trial Counsel
State Bar of California
1149 South Hill Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015-2299
Telephone: (213) 765-1356
Facsimile: (213) 765-1319
Bar # 149946
Counsel for Respondent: In Pro Per Respondent
Paul Jean Virgo,
P. O. Box 67682
Los Angeles, CA 90067-0682
Telephone: (310) 642-6900
Facsinmile: (310) 785-9081
Bar # 67900
Submitted to: Assigned Judge
<<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 9, 1999.
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 13 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. 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.
checked. Costs are to be paid in equal amounts prior to February 1 for the following membership years: two years following the effective date of the Supreme Court order of discipline. (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.
Respondent was admitted in 1999, and had no record of discipline for the first eight years of her practice.
Part of the problems Respondent experienced in the Gonzalez and Seghal matters (which are the subject of this stipulation) stemmed from Respondent’s failure to employ sufficient trained office staff. She has revamped her practice subsequent to her representation of these clients, engaged trained staff, and received additional training as to the requirements for maintaining her client trust account.
Case Number(s): 09-O-12631 and 09-O-17863
In the Matter of: Amy Maitrayee Ghosh
a. Restitution
<<not>> checked. Respondent must pay restitution (including the principal amount, plus interest of 10% per annum) to the payee(s) listed below. If the Client Security Fund (“CSF”) has reimbursed one or more of the payee(s) for all or any portion of the principal amount(s) listed below, Respondent must also pay restitution to CSF in the amount(s) paid, plus applicable interest and costs.
1. Payee
Principal Amount:
Interest Accrues From
2. Payee
Principal Amount
Interest Accrues From
3. Payee
Principal Amount
Interest Accrues From
4. Payee
Principal Amount
Interest Accrues From
<<not>> checked. Respondent must pay above-referenced restitution and provide satisfactory proof of payment to the Office of Probation not later than
<<not>> checked. Respondent must pay the above-referenced restitution on the payment schedule set forth below. Respondent must provide satisfactory proof of payment to the Office of Probation with each quarterly probation report, or as otherwise directed by the Office of Probation. No later than 30 days prior to the expiration of the period of probation (or period of reproval), Respondent must make any necessary final payment(s) in order to complete the payment of restitution, including interest, in full.
1. Payee/CSF (as applicable)
Minimum Payment Amount
Payment Frequency
2. Payee/CSF (as applicable)
Minimum Payment Amount
Payment Frequency
3. Payee/CSF (as applicable)
Minimum Payment Amount
Payment Frequency
4. Payee/CSF (as applicable)
Minimum Payment Amount
Payment Frequency
<<not>> checked. 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.
1. If Respondent possesses client funds at any time during the period covered by a required quarterly report, Respondent must file with each required report a certificate from Respondent and/or a certified public accountant or other financial professional approved by the Office of Probation, certifying that:
a. Respondent has maintained a bank account in a bank authorized to do business in the State of California, at a branch located within the State of California, and that such account is designated as a “Trust Account” or “Clients’ Funds Account”;
b. Respondent has kept and maintained the following:
i. A written ledger for each client on whose behalf funds are held that sets forth:
1. the name of such client;
2. the date, amount and source of all funds received on behalf of such client;
3. the date, amount, payee and purpose of each disbursement made on behalf of such client; and,
4. the current balance for such client.
ii. a written journal for each client trust fund account that sets forth:
1. the name of such account;
2. the date, amount and client affected by each debit and credit; and,
3. the current balance in such account.
iii. all bank statements and cancelled checks for each client trust account; and,
iv. each monthly reconciliation (balancing) of (i), (ii), and (iii), above, and if there are any differences between the monthly total balances reflected in (i), (ii), and (iii), above, the reasons for the differences.
c. Respondent has maintained a written journal of securities or other properties held for clients that specifies:
i. each item of security and property held;
ii. the person on whose behalf the security or property is held;
iii. the date of receipt of the security or property;
iv. the date of distribution of the security or property; and,
v. the person to whom the security or property was distributed.
2. If Respondent does not possess any client funds, property or securities during the entire period covered by a report, Respondent must so state under penalty of perjury in the report filed with the Office of Probation for that reporting period. In this circumstance, Respondent need not file the accountant’s certificate described above.
3. The requirements of this condition are in addition to those set forth in rule 4-100, Rules of Professional Conduct.
checked. Within one (1) year of the effective date of the discipline herein, Respondent must supply to the Office of Probation satisfactory proof of attendance at a session of the Ethics School Client Trust Accounting School, within the same period of time, and passage of the test given at the end of that session.
Case Number(s): 09-O-12631 and 09-O-17863
In the Matter of: Amy Maitrayee Ghosh
checked. a. Within 45 days/ months/ years of the effective date of the discipline herein, Respondent must develop a law office management/organization plan, which must be approved by the Office of Probation. This plan must include procedures to (1) send periodic reports to clients; (2) document telephone messages received and sent; (3) maintain files; (4) meet deadlines; (5) withdraw as attorney, whether of record or not, when clients cannot be contacted or located; (6) train and supervise support personnel; and (7) address any subject area or deficiency that caused or contributed to Respondent’s misconduct in the current proceeding.
checked. b. Within days/ (9) months/ years of the effective date of the discipline herein, Respondent must submit to the Office of Probation satisfactory evidence of completion of no less than three (3) hours of Minimum Continuing Legal Education (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 (Rule 3201, Rules of Procedure of the State Bar.)
<<not>> checked. c. Within 30 days of the effective date of the discipline, Respondent must join the Law Practice Management and Technology Section of the State Bar of California and pay the dues and costs of enrollment for one (1) year. Respondent must furnish satisfactory evidence of membership in the section to the Office of Probation of the State Bar of California in the first report required.
Other:
In the Matter of Amy Maitrayee Ghosh
Case Number 09-0-12631 and 09-0-17863
PENDING PROCEEDINGS:
The disclosure date referred to on page two, paragraph A.(7), was June 14, 2011.
Respondent admits that the following facts are true and that she is culpable of violations of the specified Rules of Professional Conduct.
Case No. 09-0-12631
FACTS
1. In Fall 2007, Maria Gonzalez hired Respondent for a personal injury case.
2. In September 2008, Respondent settled Gonzalez’ personal injury case for $10,000.
3. On September 10, 2008, Respondent received the settlement draft in the amount of $10,000 from Fireman’s Fund.
4. Respondent failed to deposit the Fireman’s Fund draft into her client trust account.
5. Respondent settled the medical lien for Gonzalez’ medical provider in April 2009.
6. It was not until Gonzlez hired counsel and sued Respondent that Respondent paid to Gonzalez the portion of the settlement owed to Gonzalez.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
By failing to deposit the Fireman’s Fund draft into her client trust account, Respondent failed to deposit funds received for the benefit of a client in a bank account labeled "Trust Account," "Client’s Funds Account" or words of similar import in wilful violation of Rule of Professional Conduct 4-100(A).
By failing to pay out to Gonzalez the portion of the settlement proceeds owed to Gonzalez until after she was sued, Respondent failed to pay promptly, as requested by a client, any funds in Respondent’s possession which the client is entitled to receive in wilful violation of Rule of Professional Conduct 4-100(B)(4).
Case No. 09-0-17863
FACTS
1. In 2007, Ajit Seghal hired Respondent to file a form 1-485 application to adjust the status of his family (the "Seghals") to permanent residents. Seghal paid Respondent a check in the amount of $4,725 for the fixed attorney fees and for advanced costs totaling $1,725.
2. Respondent failed to maintain the costs of $1,725 in her client trust account.
3. Respondent paid fees in the amount of $1,725 to the Immigration Service by checks drawn on her general business account on behalf of the Seghals.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
By failing to deposit and maintain the advanced costs, in the amount of $1,725 received from Seghal in her client trust account, Respondent failed to deposit funds received for the benefit of a client in a bank account labeled "Trust Account," "Client’s Funds Account" or words of similar import in willful violation of Rule of Professional Conduct 4-100(A).
AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE
STANDARDS FOR ATTORNEY SANCTIONS
To determine the appropriate level of discipline, the standards provide guidance. Drociak v. State Bar (1991) 52 Cal.3d 1085; In the Matter of Sampson, 3 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 119. A disciplinary recommendation must be consistent with the discipline in similar proceedings. See Snyder v. State Bar (1990) 49 Cal.3d 1302. Also, the recommended discipline must rest upon a balanced consideration of relevant factors. In the Matter of Sampson, 3 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 119.
Pursuant to Standard 1.3 of the Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct:
The primary purposes of disciplinary proceedings conducted by the State Bar
of California and of sanctions imposed upon a finding or acknowledgment of
a member’s professional misconduct are the protection of the public, the
courts and the legal profession; the maintenance of high professional
standards by attorneys and the preservation of public confidence in the legal
profession.
Pursuant to Standard 2.2(b) of the Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional
Misconduct:
Culpability of a member of commingling of entrusted funds or property with
personal property or the commission of another violation of rule 4-100, Rules
of Professional Conduct, none of which offenses result in the wilful
misappropriation of entrusted funds or property shall result in at least a three
month actual suspension from the practice of law, irrespective of mitigating
circumstances.
Respondent has engaged in violations of Rule of Professional Conduct 4-100 in two client matters. However, since Respondent’s conduct was limited in scope and resulted from Respondent’s failure to adequately staff her office, which has since been corrected, and Respondent has established compelling mitigation, a departure from the Standards requiring a three month actual suspension is warranted. In the Matter of Lazarus (Review Dept. 1991) 1 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 387; In the Matter of Bleecker (Review Dept. 1990) 1 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 113. Here there is little chance that Respondent will engage in additional misconduct.
The stipulated discipline of a sixty day actual suspension is sufficient to protect the interests of justice and the public.
FURTHER AGREEMENTS OF THE PARTIES
The factual statements contained in this Stipulation constitute admissions of fact and may not be withdrawn by either party, except with court approval.
COSTS
Respondent acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed her that as
of June 14, 2011, the estimated costs in this matter are $3,887.89. 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.
Case Number(s): 09-O-12631 and 09-O-17863
In the Matter of: Amy Maitrayee Ghosh
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: Amy Mitrayee Ghosh
Date: 6/14/11
Respondent’s Counsel: Paul Jean Virgo
Date: 6/14/11
Deputy Trial Counsel: Erin McKeown Joyce
Date: 6/14/11
Case Number(s): 09-O-12631 and 09-O-17863
In the Matter of: Amy Maitrayee Ghosh
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:
<<not>> checked. The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED and the DISCIPLINE RECOMMENDED to the Supreme Court.
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 5.58 (E) & (F), 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: Patricia McElroy
Date: July 11, 2011
[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 Los Angeles, on January 24, 2012, 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;
Paul Jean Virgo
PO Box 67682
Los Angeles, California 90067
checked by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:
Erin McKeown Joyce, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in San Francisco, California, on July 11, 2011.
Signed by:
Lauretta Cramer
Case Administrator
State Bar Court