State Bar Court of California
Hearing Department
STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING
ACTUAL SUSPENSION
Case Number(s): 08-O-14220
In the Matter of: Jane A. Conners, Bar # 226057, A Member of
the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Diane J. Meyers, 1149 S. ~Hill
St.
Los Angeles, CA 90015
(213) 765-1000
Bar # 146643,
Counsel for Respondent: In Pro Per Respondent
Jane A. Conners
2333 1st Ave., Ste. 201
San Diego, CA 92101
(619) 525-3913
Bar # 226057
Submitted to: Settlement Judge – State Bar Court Clerk’s
Office Los Angeles.
Filed: December 6, 2010.
<<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 July 8, 2003.
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 12 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: 2012 and
2013. (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.
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. .
<<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.
checked.
(4) Harm: Respondent's misconduct harmed significantly a client, the
public or the administration of justice. Respondent’s client suffered financial
harm due to the delay in his receipt of his settlement funds.
<<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.
checked.
(7) Multiple/Pattern of Misconduct: Respondent's current misconduct
evidences multiple acts of wrongdoing or demonstrates a pattern of misconduct.
Respondent misconduct included violations of rules 4-100(A) and 4-100(B)(4) of
the Rules of Professional Conduct and a violation of section 6106 of the
Business and Professions Code.
<<not>> checked. (8) No aggravating circumstances are
involved.
Additional aggravating circumstances: .
C. Mitigating Circumstances [see standard 1.2(e)]. Facts supporting
mitigating circumstances are required.
<<not>>
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.
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. See section “Additional mitigating circumstances” below.
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. See section “Additional mitigating
circumstances” below.
<<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:
Respondent suffered from extreme
and extraordinary difficulties in her personal life during the time of the
misconduct. Respondent’s father became seriously ill at the time Respondent
received her client’s settlement funds in May 2008. Respondent had to travel to
New York to care for her father. Respondent spent the majority of her time in
New York during the latter half of 2008. Respondent’s father eventually passed
away in January 2009. Respondent had to deal with her father’s estate after his
passing. Respondent’s mother also was hospitalized immediately after the death
of her father due to a serious illness. Respondent had to care for her mother
who eventually passed away in February 2010. Because Respondent’s misconduct
occurred during this difficult time period, Respondent’s misconduct is deemed
to be aberrational.
Respondent’s good character was
attested to by a wide range of references (seven in total) in the legal and
general communities who were aware of the full extent of her misconduct.
Respondent was cooperative with the State Bar during its investigation.
Respondent provided relevant bank records to the State Bar. Respondent also
entered into this stipulation of fact and conclusions of law, thereby saving
resources of the State Bar, and thereby demonstrating her recognition of
wrongdoing and remorse for her misconduct. (See In the Matter of Yagman (Review
Dept. 1997) 3 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 788, 807.)
While restitution paid under the
force or threat of disciplinary proceedings is not a mitigating factor,
Respondent made restitution of the interest Letizia lost on the settlement
money while he was awaiting receipt of the settlement funds from Respondent in
the amount of $1,000 on November 5, 2010. (Hitchcock v. State Bar (1989) 48
Cal.3d 690, 709.)
Respondent has no prior record of
discipline since her admission to the State Bar in July 2003. However,
Respondent’s misconduct occurred within five years of her admission to the
State Bar. Thus, her lack of prior discipline is insufficient for mitigation.
[In the Matter of Hertz (Review Dept. 1991) 1 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 456,473,
citing to In re Naney (1990) 51 Cal.3d 186, 196; In the Matter of Bouyer
(Review Dept. 1991) 1 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptro 404, 416-417; and Kelly v. State
Bar (1988) 45 Cal.3d 649, 658.]
D.
Discipline:
checked.
(1) Stayed
Suspension:
checked.
(a) Respondent must be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three
years.
<<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: .
checked.
(b) The above-referenced suspension is stayed.
checked. (2) Probation: Respondent must be placed on probation
for a period of three years, which will commence upon the effective date of the
Supreme Court order in this matter. (See rule 9.18, California Rules of
Court.)
checked. (3) Actual Suspension:
checked.
(a) Respondent must be actually suspended from the practice of law in the State
of California for a period of two years.
<<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: .
E. Additional Conditions of Probation:
<<not>>
checked. (1) If Respondent is actually suspended for two years or
more, he/she must remain actually suspended until he/she proves to the
State Bar Court his/her rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and
ability in the general law, pursuant to standard 1.4(c)(ii), Standards for
Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct.
checked.
(2)
During the probation period, Respondent must comply with the provisions of the
State Bar Act and Rules of Professional Conduct.
checked.
(3)
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.
(4)
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.
(5)
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. (6) 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.
(7)
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.
<<not>>
checked. (8) 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.
No Ethics School recommended. Reason: .
<<not>>
checked. (9) 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.
checked.
(10)
The following conditions are attached hereto and incorporated:
<<not>> checked. Substance
Abuse Conditions.
<<not>> checked. Law Office
Management Conditions.
<<not>> checked. Medical
Conditions.
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 during the period of actual suspension or
within one year, whichever period is longer. Failure to pass the MPRE
results in actual suspension without further hearing until passage. But see
rule 9.10(b), California Rules of Court, and rule 5.162(A) & (E), Rules of
Procedure.
<<not>> checked. No MPRE recommended. Reason: .
checked.
(2)
Rule 9.20, California Rules of Court: Respondent must comply with the
requirements of rule 9.20, California Rules of Court, and perform the acts
specified in subdivisions (a) and (c) of that rule within 30 and 40 calendar
days, respectively, after the effective date of the Supreme Court's Order in
this matter.
<<not>> checked. (3) Conditional Rule 9.20,
California Rules of Court: If Respondent remains actually suspended for
90 days or more, he/she must comply with the requirements of rule 9.20,
California Rules of Court, and perform the acts specified in subdivisions (a)
and (c) of that rule within 120 and 130 calendar days, respectively, after the
effective date of the Supreme Court's Order in this matter.
<<not>> checked. (4) Credit for Interim
Suspension [conviction referral cases only]: Respondent will be credited
for the period of his/her interim suspension toward the stipulated period of
actual suspension. Date of commencement of interim suspension: .
checked.
(5)
Other Conditions:
Respondent must attend State
Bar Ethics School and pass the test given at State Bar Ethics School. The
parties agree that Respondent may attend State Bar Ethics School and pass the
test given at State Bar Ethics School before the effective date of the
discipline imposed in this matter. Respondent must provide to the Office of
Probation satisfactory proof of attendance at a session of Ethics School and
passage of the test given at the end of that session with her first quarterly
report due to the Office of Probation.
Respondent must attend a
session of the State Bar’s Client Trust Accounting School and pass the test
given at the State Bar’s Client Trust Accounting School. The parties agree that
Respondent may attend the State Bar’s Client Trust Accounting School and pass
the test given at the State Bar’s Client Trust Accounting School before the
effective date of the discipline imposed in this matter. Respondent must
provide to the Office of Probation satisfactory proof of attendance at a
session of the State Bar’s Client Trust Accounting School and passage of the
test given at the State Bar’s Client Trust Accounting School with her first
quarterly report due to the Office of Probation.
G. SUPPORTING AUTHORITY:
Standard 2.2(a), Standards for
Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct, provides that culpability of a
member of wilful misappropriation of entrusted fund or property shall result in
disbarment. Only if the amount of funds misappropriated is insignificantly
small or if the most compelling mitigating circumstances clearly predominate,
shall disbarment not be imposed. In those latter cases, the discipline shall
not be less than a one-year actual suspension, irrespective of mitigating
circumstances. However, the standards, while entitled to great weight, do not
mandate a specific discipline. The court is "not bound to follow the
standards in talismanic fashion...," but the Supreme Court is
"...permitted to temper the letter of the law with considerations peculiar
to the offense and the offender." [Citations.] "...[A]lthough the
standards were established as guidelines, ultimately, the proper recommendation
of discipline rest[s] on a balanced consideration of the unique factors in each
case. [Citations.] " (In the Matter of VanSickle (Review Dept. 2006) 4
Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 980, 994.)
The Supreme Court has imposed,
and the Review Department has recommended, a two-year actual suspension rather
than disbarment where extenuating circumstances showed that the
misappropriation of entrusted funds was an isolated event and where other
mitigating circumstances were present warranting deviation from standard
2.2(a). [(Lawhorn v. State Bar (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1357) and In the Matter of
Davis (Review Dept. 2003) 4 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr.576.]
Attachment language (if any):.
Respondent
admits that the following facts are true and that she is culpable of the
following violations:
Case No. 08-O-14220
A. FACTS:
1. In March
2007, Ralph Letizia ("Letizia") employed attorney Raymond Marrero
("Marrero") to represent him in a breach of contract action against
Anthony Maisano dba Maisano Produce Distributors, Inc. ("Maisano").
Respondent was co-counsel to Marrero in the action. Maisano was represented by
the law firm of Scudi & Johnson
("Scudi").
2. In May
2008, Letizia settled his claims against Maisano for $25,000. The settlement
was to be disbursed as follows:
Respondent’s fee:
$ 3,750.00
Marrero’s
fee: $ 2,080.58
Marrero’s
costs: $ 5,564.75
Letizia:
$13,604.67
3. Pursuant
to the settlement, Scudi wire-transferred $24,972 ($25,000 less a wire fee) to
Respondent’s client trust account at Wells Fargo Bank ("Wells Fargo"),
account number xxxxxx5104 (the "CTA")1 on May 23, 2008. At
the time of the deposit, the balance in the CTA was $5.80. On May 23, 2008,
Wells Fargo charged a $10 service fee for the wire transfer to the CTA. The
ending balance in the CTA after the deposit and service fee was $24,967.80.
[Footnote 1: The full account number is omitted for privacy purposes.]
4. On May 27,
2008, Respondent issued check number 1041 from the CTA to Marrero for
$7,645.33, representing the fees and costs due to him from the settlement. On
May 27, 2008, check number 1041 was paid from the CTA.
5. In late
May 2008, Respondent informed Letizia that she was traveling to New York to be
with an ailing relative
6. Between
May 27, 2008 and August 7, 2008, Respondent transferred a total of $16,822.47
from the CTA to her business checking account at Wells Fargo Bank, account
number xxxxxx54732 for her own use and purpose, bringing the balance
in the CTA to $0, without disbursing the $13,604.67 to Letizia, as follows:
CTA Balance:
Date:
05-27-08, Amount: $7,500.00, CTA Balance: $9,822.47
Date:
05-29-08, Amount: $750.00, CTA Balance: $9,072.47
Date:
06-06-08, Amount: $1,000.00, CTA Balance: $ 8,072.47
Date:
06-18-08, Amount: $1,000.00, CTA Balance: $ 7,072.47
Date:
06-24-08, Amount: $3,000.00, CTA Balance: $ 4,072.47
Date:
06-25-08, Amount: $1,000.00, CTA Balance: $ 3,07247
Date:
06-30-08, Amount: $2,000.00, CTA Balance: $ 1,072.47
Date:
07-07-08, Amount: $1,000.00, CTA Balance: $ 72.47
Date:
07-10-08, Amount: $62.47, CTA Balance: $ 10.00
Date:
08-07-08, Amount: $10.00, CTA Balance: $ 0.00
[Footnote 2:
The full account number is omitted for privacy purposes.]
7. Respondent
failed to maintain $13,604.67 in the CTA on behalf of Letizia and
misappropriated said sum, between May 27 and August 7, 2008, due to her gross
neglect in managing the CTA.
8. Beginning
in or about June 2008, Letizia made repeated requests to Respondent for
disbursement of his portion of the settlement funds.
9. On or
about September 29, 2008, Letizia submitted a complaint to the State Bar of
California regarding Respondent’s failure to disburse his settlement funds.
10. On
January 20, 2009, Respondent paid $8,604.67 to Letizia, representing a partial
payment of the $13,604.67 due to him from the settlement.
11. On or
about February 21, 2009, Respondent paid $5,000 to Letizia, representing the
balance of the funds due to him from the settlement.
B.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. By not
maintaining $13,604.67 in the CTA behalf of Letizia between May 27 and August
7, 2008, Respondent wilfully failed to maintain the balance of funds received
for the benefit of a client and deposited in a bank account labeled "Trust
Account," "Client’s Funds Account" or words of similar import,
in wilful violation of rule 4-100(A) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
2. By
misappropriating $13,604.67 belonging to Letizia for her own use and purpose,
between May 27 and August 7, 2008, due to her gross negligence in managing the
CTA, Respondent committed an act of moral turpitude, in wilful violation of
section 6106 of the Business and Professions Code.
3. By not
paying $8,604.67 to Letizia until January 2009 and by not paying $5,000 to
Letizia until February 2009, Respondent failed to pay promptly, as requested by
a client, any funds in Respondent’s possession which the client was entitled to
receive, in wilful violation of rule 4-100(B)(4) of the Rules of Professional
Conduct.
FINANCIAL CONDITIONS
Case Number(s): 08-O-14220
In the Matter of: Jane A. Conners
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 .
b. Installment Restitution Payments
<<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.
c. Client Funds Certificate
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.
d. Client Trust Accounting School
<<not>> 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.
SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES
Case Number(s): 08-O-14220
In the Matter of: Jane A. Conners
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:
Jane A. Conners
Date:
November 12, 2010
Respondent’s
Counsel:
Date:
Deputy Trial
Counsel: Diane J. Meyers
Date:
November 19, 2010
ACTUAL SUSPENSION ORDER
Case Number(s): 08-O-14220
In the Matter of: Jane A. Conners
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 9.18(a), California Rules of Court.)
Signed by:
Judge of the
State Bar Court: Richard A. Platel
Date: December
2, 2010
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
[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 December 6, 2010, 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:
JANE A CONNERS
2333 1ST AVENUE, STE 201
SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
<<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:
DIANE MEYERS, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby
certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles,
California, on December 6, 2010.
Signed by:
Angela
Carpenter
Case
Administrator
State Bar
Court