State
Bar Court of California
Hearing
Department
STIPULATION
RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING
STAYED SUSPENSION; NO ACTUAL SUSPENSION
Case Number(s): 06-O-11744
In the Matter of: Ruth Rose, Bar # 145887, A Member of the
State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Lee Ann Kern, Bar # 156623
Counsel for Respondent Bar #
Submitted to: Assigned Judge State Bar Court Clerk’s Office
Los Angeles
Filed: November 28, 2006
<<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 February 20, 1990.
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
added to membership fee for calendar year following effective date of
discipline.
<<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.
<<not>> checked. (1) Prior
record of discipline [see standard 1.2(f)].
<<not>> checked. (a) State
Bar Court case # of prior case .
<<not>> checked. (b) Date
prior discipline effective
<<not>> checked. (c) Rules
of Professional Conduct/ State Bar Act violations:
<<not>> checked. (d) Degree
of prior discipline
<<not>> checked. (e) If
Respondent has two or more incidents of prior discipline, use space provided
below or a separate attachment entitled “Prior Discipline”. .
<<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.
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.
<<not>> 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.
<<not>> 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.
<<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.
<<not>> 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.
<<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 one year.
<<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: .
<<not>>
checked. (b) The above-referenced suspension is stayed.
checked. (2) Probation: Respondent
must be placed on probation for a period of two years, which will commence upon
the effective date of the Supreme Court order in this matter. (See rule 953,
California Rules of Court.)
E. Additional Conditions of Probation:
checked. (1) During the probation
period, Respondent must comply with the provisions of the State Bar Act and
Rules of Professional Conduct.
checked. (2) 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. (3) 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. (4) 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. (5) 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. (6) 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. (7) 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.
checked. No Ethics School recommended.
Reason: Respondent attended Ethics School on October 26, 2006 and passed the
test at the end of the session.
<<not>> checked. (8) 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.
<<not>> checked. (9) 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 within one year. Failure to pass the MPRE results
in actual suspension without further hearing until passage. But see rule 951 (b),
California Rules of Court, and rule 321(a)(1) & (c), Rules of Procedure.
<<not>>
checked. No MPRE recommended. Reason:
<<not>> checked. (2) Other
Conditions:
ATTACHMENT
TO
STIPULATION
RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION
IN THE MATTER
OF: RUTH ROSE
CASE
NUMBER(S): 06-0-11744
FACTS AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
Respondent
admits that the following facts are true and that she is culpable of violations
of the specified statutes and Rules of Professional Conduct.
COUNT ONE:
Business and Professions Code, section 6103
[Failure to
Obey a Court Order]
1. At all
relevant times, Respondent was counsel of record for the father of a juvenile
in a dependency proceeding.
2. Respondent
received notice of a court hearing scheduled for July 14, 2005, and failed to
appear at the hearing.
3. Respondent
received notice of a court hearing scheduled for November 14, 2005, and failed
to appear at the hearing. On or about this date, the court set an order to Show
Cause ("OSC") for November 21, 2005, as to why sanctions should not
be imposed on Respondent for her failures to appear. On or about November 14,
2005, the court served Respondent with notice of the OSC re sanctions.
Respondent received the notice.
4. On or
about November 21, 2005, Respondent failed to appear at the OSC and was
sanctioned $500, payable to the court on or before December 21, 2005. On or
about November 21, 2005, the court served Respondent with its sanctions order,
including the date by which the sanctions were required to be paid. Respondent
received the sanction order.
5. Respondent
did not pay the sanctions on or before December 21, 2005. On or about that
date, the court mailed Respondent a notice in which it again informed her of
the sanctions that had been imposed on her on November 21, 2005. Respondent
received the court’s notice.
6. Respondent
never paid the $500 in sanctions ordered by the court on November 21, 2005.
7. LEGAL
CONCLUSION: By failing to appear at the November 21, 2005, OSC and by failing
to pay the $500 in sanctions ordered on that date, Respondent failed to obey
orders of the court, in wilful violation of Business and Professions Code,
section 6103.
PENDING
PROCEEDINGS.
The
disclosure date referred to, on page one, paragraph A.(7), was November 2,
2006.
AUTHORITIES
SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.
The
Standards:
The Supreme
court gives the Standards "great weight," and will reject a recommendation
consistent with the Standards only where the Court entertains "grave
doubts" as to its propriety. (ln re Naney (1990) 51 Cal.3d 186, 190; In re
Silverton (2005) 36 Cal. 4th 81, 91-92.) Although the Standards are not
mandatory, it is well established that the Standards may be deviated from only
when there is a compelling, well-defined reason to do so. See Aronin v. State
Bar (1990) 52 Cal.3d 276, 291; Bates v. State Bar (1990) 51 Cal.3d 1056, 1060,
fn. 2. There is no compelling reason to deviate from the standards in the
instant matter.
2.6 -
Culpability of a member of a violation of Business and Professions Code section
6103 shall result in disbarment or suspension depending on the gravity of the
offense or harm, if any, to the victim.
Case Law:
In In the
Matter of Respondent X (Review Dept. 1997) 3 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 592, the
attorney violated the confidentiality provision of a court order, but contended
that the order was void for several reasons. Respondent unsuccessfully sought,
by way of a writ, to have the order declared void. The Review Department found
that unusual circumstances surrounded the attorney’s violation of the order,
including his belief that he was acting in support of sound public policy, as
well as the fact that he sought appellate review of the order. Those facts,
along with the attorney’s lack of prior discipline, caused the Review
Department to deviate from standard 2.6 and privately reprove him.
Although the
Respondent in the case at bar has no record of prior discipline, her misconduct
does not warrant deviation from standard 2.6 in that she acknowledges that she
received notice of the Order to Show Cause re Sanctions, as well as the order
imposing sanctions and, despite that knowledge, she wilfully failed to comply
with the court’s orders to attend the hearing and pay the sanctions. As such,
the recommended discipline is appropriate.
SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES
Case Number(s): 06-O-11744
In the Matter of: Ruth Rose
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: Ruth
Rose
Date: 11/09/06
Respondent’s
Counsel:
Date:
Deputy Trial
Counsel: Lee Kern
Date: 11/13/06
STAYED
SUSPENSION ORDER
Case Number(s): 06-O-11744
In the Matter of: Ruth Rose
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 953(a), California Rules of Court.)
Signed
by:
Judge of
the State Bar Court: Richard A. Platel
Date: Nov.
21, 2006
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 Los Angeles, on November 28, 2006, 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:
RUTH
C. ROSE
ROSE
& ASSOCIATES
3460
WILSHIRE BLVD #306
LOS
ANGELES, CA 90010
checked.
by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of
California addressed as follows:
LEE
ANN KERN, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby
certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles,
California, on November 28, 2006.
Signed by:
Johnnie Lee
Smith
Case
Administrator
State Bar
Court