Case Number(s): 10-H-10353
In the Matter of: Susan L. Hornsby, Bar # 216920, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Erica L. M. Dennings, Bar # 145755, Office of the Chief Trial Counsel, 180 Howard Street, San Francisco, CA 94105
Counsel for Respondent: In Pro Per Respondent, Susan L. Hornsby, P.O. Box 194, Alto, TX 75925
Submitted to: Settlement Judge, STATE BAR COURT CLERKS OFFICE SAN FRANCISCO
Filed: August 15, 2011
<<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 4, 2001.
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):
checked. Costs to be awarded to the State Bar.
<<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. ORDER OF INACTIVE ENROLLMENT: The parties are aware that If this stipulation is approved, the judge will Issue an order of inactive enrollment under Business and Professions Code section 6007, subdivision (c)(4), and Rules of Procedure of the State Bar, rule 5.111(D)(1 ).
Additional aggravating circumstances:
(Effective
January 1, 2011)
IN THE MATTER OF: Susan L Hornsby, State Bar No. 216920
STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 10-H-10353; Investigation Matters: 10-O-04899; 10-O-05226; 10-O-05297; 10-O-05777; 10-O-06399; 10-O-06419; 10-O-09533
Facts
On or about August 4, 2010, the Hearing Department of the State Bar Court of California issued an order imposing a public reproval upon respondent in State Bar case numbers 08-C-I4103 and 10-C-1341. The reproval order and its conditions became effective on or about August 25, 2010 and at all times thereafter remained in full force and effect.
One reproval condition required that respondent contact the Office of Probation within thirty days from the effective date of discipline to schedule a meeting to discuss the terms and conditions of probation. Respondent failed to contact the Office of Probation within thirty days of the effective date of discipline and to date has not contacted the Office of Probation.
Another reproval condition required respondent to attend eight self-help meetings per month; to contact the Office of Probation to obtain approval for the program she selected before attending her first meeting; and to provide documentary proof of attendance of meetings at an approved program to the Office of Probation. Respondent failed to obtain approval from the Office of Probation for any self-help program and to date has failed to submit any proof of attendance to the Office of Probation.
The reproval order required respondent to provide to the Office of Probation laboratory screening reports to show she had abstained from alcohol and/or drugs. To date, respondent has not submitted any alcohol and drug screening reports to the Office of Probation.
The reproval order further required respondent to maintain with the Office of Probation a current address and telephone number at which she could be reached. Beginning on or prior to September 2, 2010, respondent abandoned the address and telephone number she listed with the State Bar pursuant to Business and Professions Code section 6002.1; she stopped receiving calls at the telephone number, and stopped receiving mail at that address. Respondent failed to report to the Office of Probation within ten days any change in her current address and telephone number. Respondent did not update her membership records address and telephone number until June 1, 2011.
Conclusions of Law
By failing to comply with the conditions attached to a reproval administered by the State Bar pursuant to
Business and Professions Code sections 6077 and 6078 and rule 956 (now rule 9.19), California Rules of
Court, respondent willfully violated Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 1-110.
PENDING PROCEEDINGS.
The disclosure date referred to on page 2, paragraph (A)(7), was <<start redacted text>> June 30<<end redacted text>> <<start added text>>July 22<<end added text>>, 2011.
AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.
Respondent is aware that the State Bar is not seeking disbarment in the instant matter. However, because she no longer wishes to practice law in California and has no plans of returning to California, respondent is willing to stipulate to disbarment to resolve this matter and relinquish her license.
Standard 1.7(a) provided that the degree of discipline imposed in a subsequent proceeding shall be greater than that imposed in the previous proceeding.
Standard 2.9. provides that culpability of a willful .violation of role I- 110, Rules of Professional Conduct, shall result in suspension.
Case Number(s): 10-H-10353
In the Matter of: Susan L. Hornsby
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: Susan L. Hornsby, Erica L.M. Dennings
Respondent: Susan L. Hornsby
Date: 07-23-2011
Respondent’s Counsel:
Date:
Deputy Trial Counsel: Erica L.M. Dennings
Date: August
1, 2011
Case Number(s): 10-H-10353
In the Matter of: Susan L. Hornsby
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.
1. On p. 2, section B. (1)(b) - the date of prior is August 26, 2010 (not August 25).
2. On p.6, the first paragraph delete August 25 and insert August 26.
3. On p. 6 - delete 10-O-04899; 10-O-05777; 10-O-06399; 10-O-06419 since a NDC was filed in those matters on July 28, 2011.
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.)
A trial was held on July 19, 2011, and this matter was submitted for decision on that same date. However, before a decision could be rendered, the parties entered into a stipulated disbarment and since this court is approving the stipulation, no decision in this matter will be issued. Once the Supreme Court approves the stipulated disbarment case nos. 10-O-04899; 10-O-05777; 10-O-06399; 10-O-06419 will be dismissed.
Respondent is ordered transferred to involuntary inactive status pursuant to Business and Professions Code section 6007, subdivision (c)(4). Respondent’s inactive enrollment will be effective three (3) calendar days after this order is served by mail and will terminate upon the effective date of the Supreme Court’s order imposing discipline herein, or as provided for by rule 5.111(D)(2) or the Rules of Procedure of the State Bar of California, or as otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court pursuant to its plenary jurisdiction.
Signed by: Pat E. McElroy
Judge of the State Bar Court: Pat E. McElroy
Date: August 15, 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 San Francisco, on August 15, 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:
SUSAN L. HORNSBY
LAW OFFICES OF SUSAN L HORNSBY
PO BOX 194
ALTO, TX 75925
<<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:
Erica Dennings, Enforcement, San Francisco
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in San Francisco, California, on August 15, 2011.
Signed by: George Hue
Case Administrator: George Hue
State Bar Court