Case Number(s): 09-C-17114
In the Matter of: Stephen M. Weiss, Bar # 110150, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Michael J. Glass
Deputy Trial Counsel
1149 South Hill Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015-2299
(213) 765-1254
Bar # 102700
Counsel for Respondent: In Pro Per Respondent
Stephen M. Weiss
6224 Tampa Avenue
Tarzana, CA ]91345
(323) 695-8381
Bar# 110150
Submitted to: Settlement Judge, State Bar Court Clerk’s Office.
<<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 December 12, 1983.
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 10 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: February 1 in three billing cycles following the effective date of discipline. (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.
(Effective January 1, 2011)
Actual Suspension
IN THE MATTER OF: Stephen M. Weiss, State Bar No.: 110150
STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 09-C-17114
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. 09-C- 17114 (Conviction Proceedings)
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND IN CONVICTION PROCEEDING:
1. This is a proceeding pursuant to sections 6101 and 6102 of the Business and Professions
Code and rule 9.10 of the California Rules of Court.
2. On February 17, 2011, Respondent was convicted of violating Insurance Code section 750(a).
3. On June 9, 2011, the Review Department of the State Bar Court issued an order referring the
matter to the Hearing Department on the following issues:
".... for a hearing and decision recommending the discipline to be imposed in the event that the hearing department finds that the facts and circumstances surrounding the violation of Insurance Code section 750, subdivision (a) (capping), of which Stephen M. Weiss was convicted, involved moral turpitude or other misconduct warranting discipline."
FACTS:
4. In the underlying matter, between November 30, 2006, and July 25, 2007, an employee of
Respondent paid an individual for referring personal injury cases to Respondent’s law firm. Although Respondent did not authorize the payment and was not aware of it, Respondent’s failure to adequately supervise the employee allowed the situation to occur.
5. On February 17, 2011, Respondent was sentenced and received a suspended sentence, was
placed on three (3) years formal probation, was ordered to make restitution in the amount of $86,361.00 jointly and severally with co-defendant Michael Itkin to victim insurance companies Coast National ($42, 294.00), Ocean Harbor ($20,326.00), 21st Century ($11,678.00), and Mercury Insurance ($11,363.00), pay fines and assessments of $150.00, obey all laws and orders of the court, and obey all rules and regulations of probation. Respondent has paid the entire amount of $86,361.00 as restitution. Respondent: Stephen M. Weiss
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
6. By being convicted of violating Insurance Code section 750(a) (Unlawful Offer or Receipt of
Consideration for Referral of Clients ("Capping"), a misdemeanor, Respondent wilfully violated a law of this state in violation of Business and Professions Code section 6068(a).
7. Respondent’s conviction for violating Insurance Code section 750(a) (Unlawful Offer or
Receipt of Consideration for Referral of Clients ("Capping")), a misdemeanor, also constitutes
conviction of a crime involving other misconduct warranting discipline.
PENDING PROCEEDINGS.
The disclosure date referred to, on page 2, paragraph A(7), was September 15,2011.
AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.
Standard 1.7(a) provides that "Ifa member is found culpable of professional misconduct in any
proceeding in which discipline may be imposed and the member has a record of one prior imposition of discipline as defined by standard 1.2(0, the degree of discipline imposed in the current proceeding shall be greater than that imposed in the prior proceeding unless the prior discipline imposed was so remote in time to the current proceeding and the offense for which it was imposed was so minimal in severity that imposing greater discipline in the current proceeding would be manifestly unjust." Standard 3.4 provides that "Final conviction of a member of a crime which does not involve moral turpitude inherently or in the facts and circumstances surrounding the crime’s commission but which does involve other misconduct warranting discipline shall result in a sanction as prescribed under part B of these standards appropriate to the nature and extent of the misconduct found to have been committed
by the member."
In the Matter of Duxbury (Review Dept. 1994) 4 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr., the Respondent was
convicted of violating Insurance Code section 750(a) (Capping), a misdemeanor. The court found that the facts and circumstances surrounding Respondent’s conviction involved moral turpitude due to Respondent’s conversation with an undercover police officer in which Respondent approved of the scheme for referral of clients at a fee of $500 per person, and Respondent’s admission that he had engaged in this time of conduct on before. The court recommended discipline consisting of a two year stayed suspension, two years probation with conditions including a six month actual suspension. In aggravation, although Respondent did not fully comprehend the seriousness of his misconduct, he was remorseful. Respondent’s misconduct also harmed the administration of justice. Respondent was given nominal mitigation for no prior record of discipline over five years of practice. Respondent was also given some mitigation for good character letters from two judges and two attorneys.
In the Matter of Nelson (Review Dept. 1990) 1 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr., the Respondent formed a
partnership with a non-lawyer who acted as a capper for the Respondent for approximately six months until the Respondent decided to close his law office and relocate in order to cease his relationship with Respondent: Stephen M. Weiss Actual Suspension the non-lawyer. During that time, the non-lawyer also exercised independent authority to settle clients’ cases without the Respondent’s prior approval. The Respondent’s pervasive capping activity was found to involve moral turpitude. The court recommended discipline consisting of a two year stayed
suspension, two years probation with conditions, including a six month actual suspension. In mitigation, the Respondent voluntarily withdrew from the improper activities and cooperated with the State Bar. Additionally, his rehabilitation over the subsequent five years was undisputed. In the instant ease, as Respondent Stephen M. Weiss’ misconduct is not as egregious as that of the Respondent in Duxbury, supra., and Nelson, supra., discipline should be imposed as to Respondent Stephen M. Weiss consisting of a two year stayed suspension, two years probation with conditions, including a 60 day actual suspension.
COSTS OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.
Respondent acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed respondent that as of September 15, 2011, the prosecution costs in this matter are $2,287.00. 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.
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
Under standard 1.2(e)(vi) Respondent has provided the State Bar with letters attesting to Respondent’s good character from the following persons: Mac E. Nehoray, Attorney (Member of the State Bar of California), who has known Respondent for over 25 years; Joseph D. Ryan, Attorney (Member of the State Bar of California), who has known Respondent for over 25 years; David S. Lamonica, Attorney (Member of the State Bar of California), who has known Respondent for about 6 years; and Evelyn Montoya, Legal Secretary, who has known Respondent for about 10 years. Each of the persons who has provided a letter attesting to Respondent’s good character is aware of the full extent of Respondent’s misconduct.
Respondent: Stephen M. Weiss
Attachment to Stipulation
Case Number(s): 09-C-17114
In the Matter of: Stephen M. Weiss
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: Stephen M. Weiss
Date: 09/19/2011
Respondent’s Counsel:
Date:
Deputy Trial Counsel: Michael J. Glass
Date: September 22, 2011
Case Number(s): 09-C-17114
In the Matter of: Stephen M. Weiss
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.
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: 09/29/11
(Effective January 1, 2011)
Actual Suspension Order
[Rules Proc. of State Bar; Rule 5.27(B); Code Civ. Proc., § 1013a(4)]
I am a Case Administrator of the State Bar Court of California. I am over the age of eighteen and not a party to the within proceeding. Pursuant to standard court practice, in the City and
County of San Francisco, on October 4, 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 San Francisco, California, addressed as follows:
STEPHEN M. WEISS
LAW OFFICE OF STEPHEN M WEISS
6224 TAMPA AVE
TARZANA, CA 91335
checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:
MICHAEL J. GLASS, Enforcement, Los Angeles, CA
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in San Francisco, California, on October 4, 2011.
Signed by:
Lauretta Cramer
Case Administrator
State Bar Court