Case Number(s): 11-O-18098, 11-O-18136, 12-O-10265, 12-O-10588, 12-O-11469
In the Matter of: Aaron M. Ellis, Bar # 248862, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Kimberly G. Anderson, Senior Trial Counsel, The State Bar of California, 1149 S. Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90015, (213) 765-1083, Bar# 150359
Counsel for Respondent: In Pro Per Respondent, Aaron M. Ellis, Serenity Plaza, 6518 Greenleaf Ave., Suite 26, Whittier, CA 90601, (562) 277-3233, Bar # 248862
Submitted to: Settlement Judge – State Bar Court Clerk’s Office. Los Angeles
<<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 May 28, 2007.
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 18 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 5.130, Rules of Procedure.
<<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.
Case Number(s): 11-O-18098, 11-O-18136, 12-O-10265, 12-O-10588, 12-O-11469
In the Matter of: Aaron M. Ellis
a. Restitution
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: Lawrence Castro
Principal Amount: $1,800.00
Interest Accrues From: May 20, 2011
2. Payee: Jacob Koerber
Principal Amount: $1,000.00
Interest Accrues From: February 1, 2012
3. Payee:
Principal Amount:
Interest Accrues From:
4. Payee:
Principal Amount:
Interest Accrues From:
checked. Respondent must pay above-referenced restitution and provide satisfactory proof of payment to the Office of Probation not later than one (1) year after the effective date of discipline herein.
<<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.
IN THE MATTER OF: Aaron Ellis, State Bar No. 2488862
STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 11-O-18098, 11-O-18136, 12-O-10265, 12-O-10588, 12-O-11469
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-18098 (Complainant: Jessie Flores)
FACTS:
1. On August 27, 2011, Jessie Flores ("Flores") hired Respondent to file a Chapter 13 bankruptcy case on behalf of Flores and his wife. On August 27, 2011, Respondent and Flores agreed that Flores would pay Respondent a total of $3,500 in attorneys’ fees to handle the bankruptcy case and that Flores would pay monthly payments to Respondent of $500.00 per month. Respondent also agreed to provide Flores with an introductory document packet for Flores and his wife to complete.
2. On September 1,2011, Flores paid Respondent $500.00 in advanced fees.
3. Between September 1,2011 and September 26, 2011, Flores repeatedly requested that Respondent provide him with the introductory document packet for Flores and his wife to complete, but Flores never received it.
4. On September 26, 2011, Flores sent Respondent an email requesting a refund of the $500.00 and terminating Respondent’s services. Respondent received the email and he had not performed any services of value for Flores and his wife.
5. On September 27, 2011, Respondent sent Flores an email agreeing to refund Flores’s money. In the email, Respondent stated, "I understand your decision and am sending the refund this week. I apologize for the inconvenience."
6. On October 6, 2011, when Respondent had not refunded the money to Flores, Flores sent him another email confirming that he had not received the refund and that he would be filing a State Bar complaint against Respondent. Respondent received the email.
7. On October 7, 2011, Respondent sent Flores an email promising to send Flores his money that day. Respondent did not send Flores his money as promised.
8. On October 12, 2011, when Respondent had not refunded the money to Flores, Flores filed a State Bar complaint against Respondent, alleging in part, that Respondent would not return the $500.00 in unearned fees.
9. On October 31, 2011, when Respondent had not refunded the money to Flores, Flores sent him another email stating he had filed a State Bar complaint against Respondent and demanding return of his money. Respondent received the email. But Respondent did not refund the money.
10. On November 18, 2011, Respondent received a letter from State Bar Investigator Rose Ackerman, which asked him to respond to the allegations in Flores’ State Bar complaint, including specifically the allegations that Respondent had failed to refund his $500.00 in unearned fees.
11. On December 1,2011, Respondent refunded the $500.00 to Flores.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
12. By failing to refund the $500.00 to Flores from September 26, 2011 until December 1, 2011, Respondent failed to refund promptly any part of a fee paid in advance that has not been earned in willful violation of Rule 3-700(d)(2) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Case No. 11-O- 18136 (Complainant: Lawrence Castro)
FACTS:
13. On May 10, 2010, Lawrence Castro ("Castro") hired Respondent to represent him in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy matter. Castro agreed to pay Respondent $1,800.00, $1,500.00 in attorneys’ fees and $299.00 for filing fees for the bankruptcy petition.
14. On June 3, 2010, Castro paid Respondent $1,800.00, $1,500.00 which was for advanced fees and $299.00, which was for filing fees.
15. Respondent failed to file the bankruptcy petition on behalf of Castro at any time.
16. On May 20, 2011, Castro sent Respondent a letter stating that it had come to his attention that Respondent had not filed the bankruptcy petition on his behalf for one year. In the letter, Castro demanded that Respondent do one of the following three things: 1) file the bankruptcy papers immediately, 2) schedule an appointment with him to discuss the matter, or 3) refund the $1,800.00. Respondent received the letter.
17. Respondent did not file the bankruptcy petition on behalf of Castro, did not scheduled an appointment to discuss the matter with Castro and did not refund Castro’s money.
18. On July 22, 2011, Respondent sent Castro a letter notifying Castro that he was closing his law practice, but promising to handle his matter, "for as long as it is still pending in the courts." However, Respondent never filed the bankruptcy case prior to July 22, 2011 or at any time after that date.
19. After Castro received the July 22, 2011 letter, Castro telephoned Respondent at his cell phone number, which he provided to Castro in the letter. Castro left a message requesting a status update and a return telephone call, Respondent received the message from Castro, but did not call him back or provide him with any status update.
20. From July 2010 through September 2011, Castro telephoned Respondent approximately five to six times per month and left messages requesting status updates. Respondent received the telephone calls but failed to return any of them.
21. Respondent did not earn any of the fees because he did not provide any services of value to Castro and he never filed the bankruptcy petition on behalf of Castro.
22. Respondent did not incur any filing fees on behalf of Castro because he never filed the bankruptcy case.
23. Respondent failed to provide Castro with any accounting.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
24. By failing to file the bankruptcy petition on behalf of Castro for more than one year, Respondent intentionally, recklessly, or repeatedly failed to perform legal services with competence in willful violation of Rule 3-110(a) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
25. By failing to return any of Castro’s telephone calls between July 2010 through September 2011, and by failing to otherwise provide him with any status updates, Respondent failed to respond promptly to reasonable status inquiries of a client in a matter in which Respondent had agreed to provide legal services in willful violation of Business and Professions Code, section 6068(m).
26. By failing to refund Castro’s $1,500.00 unearned fees at any time between May 20, 2011 and the present, Respondent failed to refund promptly any part of a fee paid in advance that has not been earned in willful violation of Rule 3-700(d)(2) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
27. By failing to return the $299.00, which Castro gave to him to use for filing fees, at any time between May 20, 2011 and the present, Respondent, failed to pay promptly, as requested by a client, any funds in Respondent’s possession which the client is entitled to receive in willful violation of Rule 4-100(b)(4) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
28. By failing to provide Castro with any accounting for the $1,800.00 at any time between May 20, 2011 and the present, Respondent failed to render appropriate accounts to a client regarding all funds coming into Respondent’s possession in willful violation of Rule 4-100(b)(3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Case No. 12-O- 10265 (Complainant: George Colon)
FACTS:
29. In October 2010, George Colon ("Colon") hired Respondent handle a bankruptcy case, and he paid Respondent $1,500.00 in advanced fees and a $299.00 filing fee.
30. In March 2011, Respondent did file the bankruptcy petition, but then on September 12, 2011, the bankruptcy case was dismissed without Colon receiving a discharge. The case was dismissed because Respondent did not comply with the court’s order at an April 6, 2011 Meeting of Creditors hearing to file a post-petition credit counseling class certification within 45 days of the Meeting of Creditors.
31. Respondent did not tell Colon that he had not filed the post-petition credit counseling class certification at any time between April 6, 2011 and September 12, 2011, and Respondent did not tell Colon that his case had been dismissed. Colon learned of the dismissal when he received the September 12, 2011 notice from the bankruptcy court that the case was closed without discharge because the post-petition credit counseling class certification had not been filed.
32. Colon then contacted the Respondent and Respondent offered to file a form to reopen the bankruptcy and offered to pay the filing fees. But Colon went to court and filed his own paperwork and new filing fees to reopen the case.
33. Respondent refunded the $299.00 filing fees to Colon.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
34. By failing to timely file the post-petition credit counseling class certification within 45 days of the April 6, 2011 Meeting of Creditors, and by failing to discover at any time between April 6, 2011 and September 12, 2011 that the post-petition credit counseling class certification had not been filed, Respondent intentionally, recklessly, or repeatedly failed to perform legal services with competence in willful violation of Rule 3-110(a) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
35. By failing to tell Colon that he had not filed the post-petition credit counseling class certification at any time between April 6, 2011 and September 12, 2011, and by failing to tell Colon that his case had been dismissed on September 12, 2011, Respondent failed to advise his client of significant developments in a matter in which Respondent had agreed to provide legal services in willful violation of Business and Professions Code, section 6068(m).
Case No. 12-O- 10588 (Complainant: Gary Guerrero)
FACTS:
36. On November 18, 2010, Gary Guerrero ("Guerrero") hired Respondent to represent him in a child custody and marital dissolution matter. Pursuant to the retainer agreement Respondent agreed to charge Guerrero "an initial deposit" of $2,500.00 in advanced fees.
37. Between November 18, 2010 and July 31, 2011, Guerrero paid Respondent $1,800.00 of the $2,500.00 in advanced fees.
38. In or about August 2011, Respondent sent Guerrero a letter stating he could not represent him any longer thereby terminating his services
39. Between in or about August 2011 and January 4, 2012, Guerrero demanded Respondent refund his money, but Respondent did not refund the money.
40. Respondent failed to promptly submit an accounting to Guerrero upon his termination of the attorney-client relationship. Respondent acknowledges he was obligated to promptly account to Guerrero irrespective of whether he believes he earned all of the fees or not.
41. Respondent agrees, as is set forth below, to offer fee arbitration to Guerrero as a condition of his disciplinary probation in this matter and to pay any fee arbitration award.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
42. By failing to provide Guerrero with any accounting for the $1,800.00 at any time between August 2011 and the present, Respondent failed to render appropriate accounts to a client regarding all funds coming into Respondent’s possession in willful violation of Rule 4-100(b)(3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Case No. 12-O- 11469 (Complainant: Jacob Koerber)
FACTS:
43. In June 2010, Jacob Koerber ("Koerber") hired Respondent to represent him in a child custody matter. Koerber made clear that time was of the essence as he would be relocating to Illinois in July 2010. Koerber paid Respondent $1,000.00 in advanced fees plus the filing fees.
44. Respondent did not file the petition for paternity with the court at any time between July 2010 when Koerber and the opposing party had signed a child sharing agreement and October 27, 2012, even though Koerber had signed and provided the necessary documentation to Respondent in July 2012. 45. On October 27, 2010, Respondent filed a petition for paternity on behalf of Koerber, but took no further action. Respondent attempted to submit a judgment to the court consisting of a paternity agreement, but it was rejected by the court.
46. On September 28, 2011, Respondent missed a court appearance on the case and the court issued an OSC re sanctions for failing to appear pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure, section 177.5 The court set the case for an OSC hearing on November 22, 2011.
47. At the November 22, 2011 OSC hearing, Respondent advised the court that a corrected judgment would be filed.
48. In February 2012, Koerber hired new counsel to complete his case and terminated Respondent’s services.
49. Koerber repeatedly telephoned and emailed Respondent for status updates on his case. Respondent received telephone messages and emails from Koerber between July 2010 and February 2012, but failed to respond to them and failed to provide Koerber with reasonable status updates on his case.
50. Respondent did not earn any portion of the $1,000.00 in advanced fees because he did not provide any services of value to Koerber. To date, Respondent has not provided Koerber with an accounting for any services rendered and he has not refunded the unearned fees.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
51. By failing to ensure judgment was entered pursuant to the child sharing agreement at any time between October 27, 2010 and February 2012, Respondent intentionally, recklessly, or repeatedly failed to perform legal services with competence in willful violation of Rule 3-110(a) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
52. By failing to return any of Koerber’s telephone calls or respond to his emails between July 2010 through February 2012, and by failing to otherwise provide him with any status updates, Respondent failed to respond promptly to reasonable status inquiries of a client in a matter in which Respondent had agreed to provide legal services in willful violation of Business and Professions Code, section 6068(m).
53. By failing to refund Koerber’s $1,000.00 unearned fees at any time between February 2012 and the present, Respondent failed to refund promptly any part of a fee paid in advance that has not been earned in willful violation of Rule 3-700(d)(2) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
54. By failing to provide Koerber with any accounting for the $1,000.00 at any time between February 2012 and the present, Respondent failed to render appropriate accounts to a client regarding all funds coming into Respondent’s possession in willful violation of Rule 4-100(b)(3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
PENDING PROCEEDINGS.
The disclosure date referred to, on page 2, paragraph A(7), was April 17, 2012.
MITIGATION.
Candor and Cooperation: Respondent has agreed to settle this matter at an early stage in the disciplinary proceedings prior to the filing of disciplinary charges.
AGGRAVATION.
Harm: Respondent’s clients were harmed by the delay in having their cases completed, by having to hire new counsel to complete work left unfinished by Respondent and by a delay in receiving a refund of unearned fees and unspent costs.
Multiple Acts of Misconduct: Respondent’s misconduct in the five client matters involved multiple acts of misconduct.
AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.
Standard 1.6 of the Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct ("Standard" or "Standards) provides that where culpability is found with respect to more than one violation, the discipline imposed shall be the more or most severe of the different applicable sanctions.
Standard 2.4(b) provides,
Culpability of a member of wilfully failing to perform services in an individual matter or matters not demonstrating a pattern of misconduct or culpability of a member of wilfully failing to communicate with a client shall result in reproval or suspension depending upon the extent of the misconduct and the degree of harm to the client.
Standard 2.6 is applicable to the misconduct based upon the violation of Business and Professions Code, section 6068(m). It provides for, "disbarment or suspension depending upon the gravity of the offense or harm, if any, to the victim, with due regard to the purposes of imposing discipline set forth in standard 1.3."
Standard 2.2(b) provides:
Culpability of a member of commingling of entrust 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.
Standard 2.10 provides for reproval or suspension for a violation of Rule 3-700(d)(2) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
In fashioning the appropriate level of discipline, the Standards are the starting point. Nevertheless, the Court must also consider whether the recommended discipline is consistent with or disproportional to prior decisions of the California Supreme Court and the Review Department of the State Bar Court. Snyder v. State Bar (1990) 49 Cal.3d 1302, 1310-1311.
In Lester v. State Bar (1976) 17 Cal.3d 547, the Court determined that an attorney’s willful failure to perform legal services in four matters in which he was retained, combined with conduct involving failure to return unearned fees and misrepresentations warranted a two year stayed suspension and six months actual suspension. The attorney had practiced law for many years and the misconduct occurred over a two year time period. In the instant case, Respondent did not engage in any acts of dishonesty, but he did engage in misconduct in five client matters, as opposed to four client matters. The Respondent in this case is not entitled to mitigation for many years in practice.
COSTS OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.
Respondent acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed respondent that as of April 17, 2012, the prosecution costs in this matter are approximately $6,365.00. 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.
OTHER CONDITIONS OF PROBATION
Fee Arbitration Conditions:
A. Duty to Notify Individuals of Right to Mandatory Fee Arbitration Within thirty (30) days of the effective date of discipline, Respondent agrees to send a letter by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the individuals set forth below and agrees to therein offer to initiate, pay any costs and fees associated with the fee arbitration, and participate in binding fee arbitration with said individuals, upon the request of any such individuals, regarding fees respondent received for representation of the former clients set forth below, unless Respondent has previously sent such a written offer to said individuals. The letter shall include the address and phone number of the Office of Probation along with a statement that the Office of Probation will be monitoring his fee arbitration conditions and may be contacted by the individual.
Gary Guerrero
13310 Safari Dr.
Whittier, CA 90605
B. Upon Individual’s Consent to Mandatory Fee Arbitration, Duty to Initiate Fee Arbitration
Within forty (40) days after the effective date of discipline, Respondent agrees to provide the Office of Probation with a copy of the letters offering to initiate and participate in fee arbitration with the individuals set forth above, along with a copy of the return receipt from the U.S. Postal Service, or other proof of mailing.
Within sixty (60) days after the effective date of discipline, Respondent agrees to provide the Office of Probation a declaration from each of the individuals setting forth that a letter had been received from Respondent offering to initiate, pay any costs and fees associated with the fee arbitration, and participate in fee arbitration.
Respondent agrees to advise the Office of Probation, in writing, of any request to participate in fee arbitration made by any individual set forth above within fifteen (15) days after any such request or within sixty (60) days after the effective date of discipline, whichever is later. Respondent agrees to provide the Office of Probation with any information requested to verify Respondent’s compliance, including submission of any written request for fee arbitration or the submission of a declaration from any individual setting forth the date arbitration was requested.
Respondent agrees to initiate fee arbitration within fourteen (14) days of any request, including making any payment required by the organization conducting the fee arbitration. Respondent agrees to fully and promptly participate in the fee arbitration as directed by the organization conducting the fee arbitration. Respondent will not be permitted to raise the statute of limitations as a defense to the fee arbitration with respect to any of the above individuals.
Respondent further agrees to accept binding arbitration on the arbitration request form. If the arbitration proceeds as non-binding, however, Respondent hereby agrees to abide by the arbitration award and foregoes the right to file an action seeking a trial de novo in court to vacate the award.
C. Duty to Comply with the Arbitration Award
Within thirty (30) days after issuance of any arbitration award or judgment or agreement reflected in a stipulated award issued pursuant to a fee arbitration matter, or within sixty (60) days after the effective date of discipline, whichever is later, Respondent agrees to provide a copy of said award, judgment or stipulated award to the Office of Probation.
Respondent agrees to abide by any award, judgment or stipulated award of any such fee arbitrator and agrees to provide proof thereof to the Office of Probation within thirty (30) days after compliance with any such award, judgment or stipulated award. If the award, judgment or stipulated award does not set forth a deadline for any payment, Respondent is to make full payment within thirty (30) days of the issuance of any such award, judgment or stipulated award.
To the extent that Respondent has paid any fee arbitration award, judgment or stipulated award prior to the effective date of the Supreme Court’s final disciplinary order in this proceeding, Respondent will be given credit for such payment(s) provided satisfactory proof of such payment(s) is or has been shown to the Office of Probation.
D. Obligation to Pay Restitution to the Client Security Fund.
If the State Bar Client Security Fund has reimbursed any of the above individuals for all or any portion of any award, judgment or stipulated award pursuant to fee arbitration, respondent agrees to pay restitution to the Client Security Fund of the amount paid, plus applicable interest and costs, in accordance with Business and Professions Code section 6140.5. To the extent the Client Security Fund has paid only principal amounts, Respondent will still be liable for interest payments to such individuals. Any restitution to the Client Security Fund is enforceable as provided in Business and Professions Code section 6140.5, subdivision (c) and (d).
E. Waiver of Objections
If the fee arbitration proceeding results in an award to any of the above individuals, Respondent waives any objections related to the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel, Client Security Fund or State Bar Court notification to any such individual regarding assistance in obtaining restitution or payment from the Client Security Fund or from Respondent.
F. Effect of Failure to Comply with Fee Arbitration Conditions
Respondent understands that failure to strictly comply with these conditions regarding fee arbitration may result in a motion to revoke his probation in this matter, the filing of new disciplinary charges and/or additional discipline. Respondent understands that failure to strictly comply with these conditions regarding fee arbitration may result in this Court ordering Respondent to pay back the full amount of attorneys’ fees paid to Respondent by each of the individuals listed plus 10% interest from the date Respondent received the fees.
SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES
Case Number(s): 11-O-18098, 11-O-18136, 12-O-10265, 12-O-10588, 12-O-11469
In the Matter of: Aaron M. Ellis
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: Aaron M. Ellis
Date: April 20, 2012
Respondent’s Counsel:
Date:
Deputy Trial Counsel: Kimberly G. Anderson
Date: April 24, 2012
Case Number(s): 11-O-18098, 11-O-18136, 12-O-10265, 12-O-10588, 12-O-11469
In the Matter of: Aaron M. Ellis
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.
· Substitute "3-700(D)(2)" for "3-700(d)(2)" at p. 10, paragraph 12; p. 11, paragraph 26; p. 14, paragraph 53; and p. 15, third full paragraph.
· At p. 11, paragraph 27, substitute "4-100(B)(4)" for "4-100(b)(4)";
· Substitute "4-100(B)(3)" for "4-100(b)(3)" at p. 11, paragraph 28, line 3; p. 13, paragraph 42; p. 14, paragraph 54, line 3;
· Substitute "3-110(A)" for "3-110(a)" at p. 11, paragraph 24; p. 12, paragraph 34; p. 14, paragraph 51; and
· At p. 13, paragraph 44, lines 2 and 3, substitute "2010" for "2012".
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: Donald F. Miles
Date: May 9, 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 Los Angeles, on May 10, 2012, I deposited a true copy of the following document(s):
STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING ACTUAL SUSPENSION
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:
AARON M. ELLIS
12361 PENN ST
WHITTIER, CA 90602
checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:
KIMBERLY ANDERSON, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, California, on May 10, 2012.
Signed by:
Tammy Cleaver
Case Administrator
State Bar Court