Case Number(s): 08-O-11896
In the Matter of: Pejman Rahnama, Bar # 176504, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Anthony J. Garcia, Deputy Trial Counsel
Office of the Chief Trial Counsel
1149 South Hill Street, 10th Fl.
Los Angeles, CA 90015
Telphone: (213) 765-1089
Bar #171419
Counsel for Respondent: Theodore A Cohen
Law Offices of Theodore A Cohen
4601 Admiralty Way
Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
Telephone: (310) 271-7164
Bar # 28637
Submitted to:
Filed: April 29, 2011. 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 June 12, 1995.
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 are added to membership fee for calendar year following effective date of discipline.
<<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.
IN THE MATTER OF: Pejman Rahnama
CASE NUMBER(S): 08-O-11896
FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Pejman Rahnama ("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. 08-O-i i 896 (Complainant: Kevin Grant)
FACTS:
1. On September 11, 2006, Jesus Trasvina was injured in an automobile accident. He hired Respondent to represent him in his claim. The other party to the accident was insured by Lincoln General Insurance Company ("Lincoln").
2. Respondent and. Trasvina signed a medical lien in favor of Trasvina’s medical provider, University Medical Center ("UMC").
3. On May 8, 2007, Respondent reached a settlement of Trasvina’s claim against Lincoln for a total of $28,000.
4. Lincoln paid Trasvina’s claim by issuing 2 checks. On May 8, 2007, Lincoln issued one check payable to Respondent in the amount of $9,400 and mailed it to Respondent. Respondent received the check, deposited it into his CTA, and properly disbursed the funds.
5. On May 8, 2007, Lincoln issued a second settlement check payable to Jesus Trasvina and UMC, in the amount of $18,600.00 ("UMC settlement"). The UMC settlement funds were issued to pay for Trasvina’s medical expenses. Lincoln delivered UMC settlement check to Respondent. Respondent received the UMC settlement check.
6. As of May 8, 2007, UMC was owed $15,716.91 for the medical services it provided to Trasvina. UMC sent several letters to Respondent requesting that he pay its bill.
7. Respondent did not deposit the UMC settlement check it into hs CTA, nor put in a safe deposit box or other place of safekeeping. Instead, Respondent left the UMC settlement check in Trasvina’s file for about 6 months.
8. Respondent did not have adequate office procedures in place to insure that the UMC settlement check was handled in a manner that was consistent with the California Rules of Professional Conduct.
9. On November 6, 2007, after holding the UMC settlement check for 6 months, Respondent’s staff endorsed the UMC settlement check and deposited it into his client trust account. But Respondent did not promptly disburse funds to UMC. Respondent retained the funds in his CTA.
10. On May 2, 2008, UMC served Respondent with a lawsuit seeking to recover the sums that it was owed for the services it provided to Trasvina.
11. On May 2, 2008, Respondent issued a check from his CTA payable to UMC, in the amount of $15,716.91, paying UMC’s lien in full.
12. Respondent disbursed the remaining funds to Trasvina.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
13. By not having adequate office procedures in place to insure that settlement funds were promptly deposited into his CTA or kept in a place of safekeeping, and by not complying with his duty to insure that Trasvina’s medical lienholder was promptly paid, Respondent intentionally, recklessly, or repeatedly failed to perform legal services with competence in wilful violation of California Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 3-110(A).
14. By failing to deposit the settlement check into his client trust account for almost 6 months, 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 California Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 4-100(A).
15. By failing to pay UMC’s lien for over a year, Respondent wilfully 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 violation of Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 4-100(B)(4).
PENDING PROCEEDINGS.
The disclosure date referred to, on page 2, paragraph A(7), was April 12, 2011.
AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.
Standards
Standard 2.2(b) which states that culpability of a member of a violation of rule 4-100 of the Rules of Professional Conduct that does not include misappropriation shall result in at least a three month suspension.
Cases
In the Matter of Lazarus, 1 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 387
Lazarus was found to have violated the rules for handling client trust funds but his actions did not involve moral turpitude or misappropriation. Lazarus was disciplined by the imposition of a two-month stayed suspension with one year probation and no actual suspension. Likewise, Respondent violated the rules for handling trust funds by actions that did not involve moral turpitude or misappropriation. Respondent, at the time of the misconduct, also lacked adequate office procedures to ensure that client funds were handled properly.
Case Number(s): 08-O-11896
In the Matter of: Pejman Rahnama
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: Pejman Rahnama
Date: April 12, 2011
Respondent’s Counsel: Theodore A. Cohen
Date:
Deputy Trial Counsel: Anthony J. Garcia
Date:
Case Number(s): 08-O-11896
In the Matter of: Pejman Rahnama
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: Pejman Rahnama
Date: April 12, 2011
Respondent’s Counsel: Theodore A. Cohen
Date: April 18, 2011
Deputy Trial Counsel: Anthony J. Garcia
Date: April 12, 2011
Case Number(s): 08-O-11896
In the Matter of: Pejman Rahnama
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.
On page 5 of the stipulation, an "X" is inserted in the box next to paragraph D.(1)(a).
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: April 29, 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 April 29, 2011, 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:
THEODORE A COHEN, ESQ.
LAW OFFICES OF THEODORE A COHEN
4601 ADMIRALTY WAY
MARINA DEL REY, CA 90292
checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:
ANTHONY GARCIA, ESQ., Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, California, on April 29, 2011.
Signed by:
Ruth Luthi
Case Administrator
State Bar Court