Case Number(s): 11-O-15840
In the Matter of: Timothy A. Reed, Bar # 242578, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Esther Rogers, Deputy Trial Counsel, State Bar of California, 180 Howard Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, (415)532-2258, Bar # 148264
Counsel for Respondent: Carver Farrow, 1320 White Oaks Road, San Jose, CA 95008, (408) 261-5886, Bar # 202277
Submitted to: Assigned Judge – State Bar Court Clerk’s Office San Francisco.
Filed: August 17, 2012.
<<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 1, 2006.
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 8 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.
IN THE MATTER OF: Timothy A. Reed, State Bar No. 242578
STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 11-O-15840
FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
Respondent admits that the following facts are true and that he is culpable of violations of the specified statutes and/or Rules of Professional Conduct.
Case No. 11-O-15840 (Complainant: Reynaldo Jocson)
FACTS:
1. On January 21, 2010, Reynaldo Jocson hired respondent’s law firm to provide legal services in connection with negotiating and obtaining a home mortgage loan modification. Between January 25, 2010 and February 25, 2010, Jocson paid respondent $4,200 as advanced fees in the loan modification matter.
2. In March 2012, respondent repaid Jocson $4,200.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
3. By offering to perform a home mortgage loan modification for Jocson for a fee and demanding, charging, collecting and receiving fees from Jocson prior to fully performing each and every service respondent contracted to perform or represented he would perform, respondent negotiated, arranged or otherwise offered to perform a mortgage loan modification for a fee paid by the borrower, and demanded, charged, collected or received such fee prior to fully performing each and every service respondent had contracted to perform or represented that he would perform in violation of section 2944.7(a) of the Civil Code, respondent willfully violated Business and Professions Code section 6106.3.
ADDITIONAL FACTS RE MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES.
Standard 1.2(e)(v)-Candor and Cooperation: Respondent cooperated with the State Bar by voluntarily meeting with the State Bar investigator early in the investigation process and admitted his culpability. Respondent cooperated with the victim by repaying him the $4,200 during the investigation process and before any settlement negotiations with the State Bar.
Additional Mitigating Circumstances: Respondent has been admitted four years before the misconduct. He is entitled to minimal mitigation credit.
PENDING PROCEEDINGS.
The disclosure date referred to, on page 2, paragraph A(7), was July 9, 2012.
AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.
Standard 2.10-Culpability shall result in a reproval or suspension according to the gravity of the offense or the harm, if any, to the victim. Respondent’s conduct was on the low end of the spectrum for loan modification cases, only involved one client and respondent repaid the victim early in the investigation process. Therefore, respondent received a public reproval rather than a suspension.
COSTS OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.
Respondent acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed respondent that as of July 9, 2012, the prosecution costs in this matter are approximately $3,000. 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.
SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES
Case Number(s): 11-O-15840
In the Matter of: Timothy A. Reed
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: Timothy A. Reed
Date: July 20. 2012
Respondent’s Counsel: Carver Farrow
Date: July 20, 2012
Deputy Trial Counsel: Esther Rogers
Date: July 25, 2012
Case Number(s): 11-O-15840
In the Matter of: Timothy Reed
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 5.58 (E) & (F), 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: Patricia McElroy
Date: August 17, 2012
[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 August 17, 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 San Francisco, California, addressed as follows:
CARVER C. FARROW
THE FARROW LAW FIRM
1320 WHITE OAKS ROAD
SAN JOSE, CA 95008
<<not>> checked. by certified mail, No., with return receipt requested, through the United States Postal Service at , California, addressed as follows:
<<not>> checked. by overnight mail at, California, addressed as follows:
<<not>> checked. by fax transmission, at fax number . No error was reported by the fax machine that I used.
<<not>> checked. By personal service by leaving the documents in a sealed envelope or package clearly labeled to identify the attorney being served with a receptionist or a person having charge of the attorney’s office, addressed as follows:
checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:
Esther Rogers, Enforcement, San Francisco
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in San Francisco, California, on August 17, 2012.
Signed by:
George Hue
Case Administrator
State Bar Court