State Bar Court of California

Hearing Department

STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING

ACTUAL SUSPENSION

Case Number(s): 11-O-10456, 11-O-12460, 11-O-1.5089

In the Matter of: Paul Frederick Opel, Bar # 101874, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).

Counsel For The State Bar: Dane C. Dauphine, Bar # 121606, Supervising Trial Counsel, 1149 S. Hill St., Los Angeles, CA 90015, 213-765-1293

Counsel for Respondent: In Pro Per Respondent, Paul F. Opel, 5945 Alonzo Ave., Encino, CA 91316, Bar# 101874

Submitted to:  Assigned Judge, STATE BAR COURT CLERK’S OFFICE LOS ANGELES

Filed: September 8, 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.

A.  Parties' Acknowledgments:

1. Respondent is a member of the State Bar of California, admitted December 1, 1981.

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.

<<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.

B. Aggravating Circumstances [for definition, see Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct, standard 1.2(b)]. Facts supporting aggravating circumstances are required.

checked. (1) Prior record of discipline [see standard 1.2(f)]

checked. (a)                  State Bar Court case # of prior case 07-O-13557, et al.

checked. (b)                  Date prior discipline effective June 25, 2011.

checked. (c)                  Rules of Professional Conduct/ State Bar Act violations: Rule of Professional Conduct, rules 1-320(A), 3-110(A), 3-400(B), 3-700(D)(1), 3-700(D)(2), 4-100(A), and 4-100(B)(3); Bus. & Prof. C. sections 6068(o)(3), and 6106

checked. (d)                  Degree of prior discipline Two years stayed suspension, four years probation with one year actual suspension

<<not>> checked. (e)    If Respondent has two or more incidents of prior discipline, use space provided below.

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. Respondent did not inform client Jeannette V. Gonzalez that Ulysses Maldonado was not an attorney and allowed her to believe that Moldonado’s representations.

<<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 misconduct has deprived former clients of fees which Respondent was required to refund as unearned.

<<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’s misconduct involves three separate client motters

<<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. 

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. Respondent has been cooperative with the State Bar in acknowledging and stipulating to the misconduct.

<<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.

<<not>> 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.

<<not>> 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.

<<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: 

D. Discipline:

checked. (1)           Stayed Suspension:

checked. (a) Respondent must be suspended from the practice of law for a period of (3) 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:

<<not>> checked. (b) The above-referenced suspension is stayed.

checked. (2) Probation:  Respondent must be placed on probation for a period of four (4) 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 (2) years.

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.

                                       checked No Ethics School recommended.  Reason: Respondent is required to complete Ethics School in case no. 07-O-13557.

<<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.

<<not>> 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:

<<not>> 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.

checked. No MPRE recommended.  Reason: Respondent was ordered to pass the MPRE in case no. 07-O-13557

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:

<<not>> checked. (5)   Other Conditions:

Attachment language (if any):

FINANCIAL CONDITIONS

Case Number(s): 11-O-10456, 11-O-12460, 11-O-15089

In the Matter of: Paul Frederick Opel, no. 101874

a. Restitution

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: Luis Rodriguez

   Principal Amount: $ 5,000.00

   Interest Accrues From: November 1, 2010

2. Payee: Marie E. Tamayo

   Principal Amount: $1,600.00

   Interest Accrues From: April 1, 2011

3. Payee:

   Principal Amount:

   Interest Accrues From:

4. Payee:

   Principal Amount:

   Interest Accrues From:

checked. Respondent must pay above-referenced restitution and provide satisfactory proof of payment to the Office of Probation not later than one year after the effective date of the suspension in this matter.

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

<<not>> 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.

ATTACHMENT TO

STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION

IN THE MATTER OF: Paul Frederick Opel, State Bar No. 101874

STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 11-O-10456, 11-O-12460, 11-O-15089

FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.

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. 11-O- 10456 (Complainant: Luis Rodriguez)

FACTS:

1. On or about July 7, 2010, Luis Rodriguez ("Rodriguez") employed Respondent for legal services. During the months of July and August 2010, Rodriquez paid Respondent advanced fees of $5,000.

2. On or about October 3, 2010, Rodriguez decided that he did not need legal services and terminated Respondent’s employment. At that time, Rodriguez requested a refund of the advanced fees. Respondent employee, Ulysses Maldonado, informed Rodriguez that it would take 30 days to provide a refund.

3. Respondent did not provide any legal services to Rodriguez and did not earn any of the $5,000 received from Rodriguez in advanced fees. At no time has Respondent refunded any of the $5,000 advanced fees received from Rodriguez.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:

4. By not refunding any of the $5,000 in unearned fees to Rodriguez, Respondent failed to refund promptly any part of a fee paid in advance that has not been earned in willful violation of Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 3-700(D)(2).

Case No. 11-O-12460 (Complainant: Maria E. Tamayo)

FACTS:

5. On or about January 27, 2011, Maria E. Tamayo ("Tamayo") employed Respondent to represent her in filing and obtaining dissolution of marriage and child support. At or about that time, Tamayo paid Respondent $1,600 in advanced fees.

6. In or about February 2011, Tamayo contacted Respondent’s office to inquire into the status of her case, and Respondent’s employee, Ulysses Maldonado, informed her that a petition had been filed on her behalf in court and told her she could confirm that by checking at the court.

7. At no time did Respondent file a petition on behalf of Tamayo in court.

8. In or about February 2011, Tamayo checked at the court and found no record of a proceeding filed on her behalf. Thereafter, Tamayo contacted Respondent’s office and asked for an appointment to meet with Respondent. Ulysses Maldonado refused to give Tamayo an appointment to meet with Respondent. Respondent did not contact Tamayo in response to Tamayo’s request to meet with him.

9. On or about March 15, 2011, Tamayo went to Respondent’s office and requested a refund of the fees paid. Respondent did not refund the unearned fees to Tamayo.

10. On or about May 6, 2011, following a hearing attended by Respondent, Tamayo obtained a small claims judgment against Respondent for the $1,600 in fees and $155 in costs for a total judgment of $1,755.

11. To date, Respondent has not refunded any of the $1,600 to Tamayo.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:

12. By not filing a petition for dissolution on behalf of Tamayo, Respondent intentionally, recklessly, or repeatedly failed to perform legal services with competence in willful violation of Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 3-110(A).

13. By not responding to Tamayo’s request to meet with him to discuss the status of her case, Respondent failed to respond promptly to reasonable status inquiries of a client in a matter in which Respondent had agreed to provide legal services.

14. By not refunding the $1,600 in unearned fees to Tamayo, Respondent failed to refund promptly any part of a fee paid in advance that has not been earned.

Case No. 11-O-15089 (Complainant: Jeannette V. Gonzalez)

FACTS:

1. On December 2, 2010, Jeannette V. Gonzalez ("Gonzalez") visited Respondent’s law office and met with Ulysses Maldonado ("Maldonado"), Respondent’s employee. Maldonado informed Gonzalez that he was an attorney and agreed to represent her in a civil action filed against her for a fee of $1,500. On December 2, 2010, and January 12, 2011, Gonzalez paid a total of $1,500 to Maldonado who provided her with receipts stamped with the name of Respondent’s law office.

2. On January 18, 2010, Respondent appeared in court to represent Gonzalez. After the hearing, Gonzalez asked Respondent where Maldonado was, and Respondent told Gonzalez that Maldonado could not make it so Respondent came instead. Gonzalez late spoke to Maldonado who told Gonzalez that he was in court on another matter so Respondent had appeared to represent her instead.

3. On February 4, 2011, Gonzalez returned to court, and Respondent appeared to represent her. Respondent met with the other party and negotiated a settlement of the claims against Gonzalez.

4. Respondent received a portion of the $1,500 fees Gonzalez paid to Maldonado.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:

5. By allowing Maldonado to hold himself out as an attorney to Gonzalez, Respondent aided in the unlawful practice of law in willful violation of rule 1-300(A).

6. By dividing the fees received from Gonzalez with Maldonado, Respondent shared a legal fee with a person who is not a lawyer in willful violation of Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 1-320(A).

PENDING PROCEEDINGS.

The disclosure date referred to, on page 2, paragraph A(7), was August 1,2011.

AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.

According to Standard 2.4 of the Standards for Attorney Discipline, the appropriate discipline for culpability of a member of a pattern of willfully failing to perform services demonstrating the member’s abandonment of the causes in which he or she was retained shall result in disbarment. Such misconduct in an individual matter or in matters not demonstrating a pattern shall result in reproval or suspension.

According to Standard 2.10, a violation of any other provision of the Business & Professions Code or the Rules of Professional Conduct not specified in any other standard shall result in a reproval or suspension according to the gravity of the offense or the harm, if any, to the victim, with due regard to the purposes of imposing discipline.

Respondent is currently suspended for one year based on 12 cases involving misconduct arising from his involvement with non-attorney Ulysses Maldonado over the years from 2007 to 2010. His record of 30 years of practice without prior discipline was recognized as mitigation, but the fact that he had abdicated responsibility for his law practice to the non-attorney warranted a lengthy actual suspension. The misconduct in this matter includes only three cases during the period from July 2010 to March 2011, but the misconduct constitutes a continuation of the prior misconduct. Therefore, even though this matter involves only three client matters, since they constitute a continuation of the misconduct in the prior matters, this matter warrants the two year suspension agreed to by the parties. Pursuant to this stipulation, Respondent will have to establish rehabilitation at a hearing in order to return to the practice of law.

SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES

Case Number(s): 11-O-10456, 11-O-12460, 11-O-15089

In the Matter of: Paul Frederick Opel, no. 101874

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: Paul Frederick Opel, Dane C. Dauphine

Respondent: Paul Frederick Opel

Date: 06/16/2011

Respondent’s Counsel:

Date:

Deputy Trial Counsel: Dane C. Dauphine

Date: 08/25/2011

ACTUAL SUSPENSION ORDER

Case Number(s): 11-O-10456, 11-O-12460, 11-O-15089

In the Matter of: Paul Frederick Opel, no. 101874

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.

Page 2, Paragraph (8): The box for the first option is checked, adding the following language to this stipulation and order: "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."

Page 2, ¶ Paragraph B(2): The word "that" is deleted from the final sentence of this paragraph.

Page 4: The box for paragraph D(1)(b) is deemed checked.

Page 10, Paragraph 13." The following words are added to the final sentence of this paragraph: "in willful violation of section 6068(m)."

Page 10, Paragraph 14: The following words are added to the final sentence of this paragraph: "in willful violation of rule 3-700(D)(2)."

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: Donald F. Miles

Judge of the State Bar Court: Donald F. Miles

Date: 09/08/2011

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 September 8, 2011, I deposited a true copy of the following document(s):

STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING ACTUAL SUSPENSION

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:

PAUL FREDERICK OPEL

PAUL F. OPEL

5945 ALONZO AVE

ENCINO, CA 91316

checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:

DANE DAUPHINE, Enforcement, Los Angeles

I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, California, on September 8, 2011.

Signed by: Tammy Cleaver

Case Administrator: Tammy Cleaver

State Bar Court