Case Number(s): 09-O-14679-DFM
In the Matter of: Vincent V. Shulman, Bar # 207105, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Kevin B. Taylor,
Office of the Chief Trial Counsel
1149 S. Hill Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015
(213) 765-1000
Bar # 151715
Counsel for Respondent: In Pro Per Respondent
Vincent V. Shulman
1801 Century Park East, #1430
Los Angeles, CA 90067
(310) 551-1550
Bar # 207105
Submitted to: Assigned Judge
Filed: November 17, 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 5, 2000.
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 8 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. Costs are added to membership fee for calendar year following effective date of discipline (public reproval).
checked. Case ineligible for costs (private reproval).
<<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.
9. The parties understand that:
<<not>> checked. (a) A private reproval imposed on a respondent as a result of a stipulation approved by the Court prior to initiation of a State Bar Court proceeding is part of the respondent’s official State Bar membership records, but is not disclosed in response to public inquiries and is not reported on the State Bar’s web page. The record of the proceeding in which such a private reproval was imposed is not available to the public except as part of the record of any subsequent proceeding in which it is introduced as evidence of a prior record of discipline under the Rules of Procedure of the State Bar.
checked. (b) A private reproval imposed on a respondent after initiation of a State Bar Court proceeding is part of the respondent’s official State Bar Membership records, is disclosed in response to public inquiries and is reported as a record of public discipline on the State Bar’s web page.
<<not>> checked. (c) A public reproval imposed on a respondent is publicly available as part of the respondent’s official State Bar membership records, is disclosed in response to public inquiries and is reported as a record of public discipline on the State Bar’s web page.
Respondent cooperated with State Bar and acknowledged the wrongfulness of his conduct by entering into this stipulation.
Attachment language (if any):.
None
IN THE MATTER OF: VINCENT V. SHULMAN
STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 09-O-14679-DFM
Vincent V. Shulman, Respondent herein, admits that the following facts are true and that he is culpable of the violation of the specified statutes and/or Rules of Professional Conduct.
FACTS
1. In November 2007, Zeev Goldshmit employed Respondent to represent him in a personal injury claim arising out of an automobile accident which occurred in January 2007.
2. On November 28, 2007, Respondent filed a complaint in the Los Angeles Superior Court on behalf of Goldshmit.
3. On March 18, 2008, the Court in the Goldshmit action served Respondent with an order to show cause, to be heard on May 9, 2008, on the question of whether sanctions should be imposed for the plaintiff’s failure to prosecute the Goldshmit action. Respondent received the order to show cause.
4. On March 21, 2008, Respondent filed a case management statement in the Goldshmit action stating that the complaint had not been served upon the defendants in the action.
5. Thereafter, Respondent did not appear for the May 9, 2008 hearing on the Court’s order to show cause. Therefore, the Court dismissed the Goldshmit action without prejudice for the plaintiff’s failure to prosecute same. The Court then served Respondent with notice of the dismissal. Respondent received the notice.
6. Respondent contends that his failure to appear at the May 9, 2008 hearing was due to a calendaring error.
7. On May 27, 2008, Respondent wrote to Goldshmit asking Goldshmit to contact him about the personal injury action. However, Respondent did not advise Goldshmit of the dismissal of his case.
8. Thereafter, Respondent took no further action on the Goldshmit case. On September 19, 2008, the Court dismissed the Goldshmit matter with prejudice.
9. Respondent contends that Goldshmit did not communicate with him again until February 2009.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
10. By failing to appear at the May 9, 2008 hearing and failing to take any action on the Goldshmit matter after the Court dismissed the case without prejudice, Respondent failed to perform the legal services for which he was employed in willful violation of rule 3-110(A) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
11. By failing to advise Goldshmit of the fact that his action had been dismissed by the Court, Respondent failed to keep his client reasonably informed of significant developments in a matter in which he agreed to provide legal services in willful violation of Business and Professions Codes, section 6068(m).
DISCUSSION RE RECOMMENDED DISCIPLINE
Standard 2.4 of the Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct provides as follows:
Culpability of a member of willfully failing to perform services in an individual
matter or matters not demonstrating a pattern of misconduct or culpability of a member of willfully 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.
The parties submit that this reproval with public disclosure, along with the rehabilitative terms attached thereto, is consistent with the Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct and sufficient to address Respondent’s misconduct and protect the public.
WAIVER OF VARIANCE BETWEEN NOTICE OF DISCIPLINARY CHARGES AND
STIPULATED FACTS AND CULPABILITY
The parties waive any variance between the Notice of Disciplinary Charges filed in this matter on August 2, 2011 and the facts and/or conclusions of law contained in this stipulation. Additionally, the parties waive the issuance of an amended Notice of Disciplinary Charges. Finally, the parties waive the right to a formal hearing on any charge not included in the pending Notice of Disciplinary Charges.
PENDING PROCEEDINGS
The disclosure date referred to, on page 2, paragraph A(7), was November 16, 2011.
Case Number(s): 09-O-14679-DFM
In the Matter of: Vincent V. Shulman
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: Vincent V. Shulman
Date: 11/16/11
Respondent’s Counsel:
Date:
Deputy Trial Counsel: Kevin B. Taylor
Date: 11/16/11
Case Number(s): 09-O-14679
In the Matter of: Vincent V. Shulman
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 REPROVAL IMPOSED.
<<not>> checked. The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED AS MODIFIED as set forth below, and the REPROVAL IMPOSED.
<<not>> checked. All court dates in the Hearing Department 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 5.58 (E) & (F), Rules of Procedure.) Otherwise the stipulation shall be effective 15 days after service of this order.
Failure to comply with any conditions attached to this reproval man constitute cause for a separate proceeding for willful breach of rule 1-110, Rules of Professional Conduct.
Signed by:
Judge of the State Bar Court: Donald F. Miles
Date: 11/16/11
[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 January 24, 2012, 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;
VINCENT V. SHULMAN
1801 Century park East #1430
Los Angeles, California 90067
checked by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:
Kevin Taylor, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, California, on November 17, 2011.
Signed by:
Rose Luthi
Case Administrator
State Bar Court