Case Number(s): 11-O-15095
In the Matter of: Rene Chavez Nunez, Bar # 226171, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Charles T. Calix, Deputy Trial Counsel, 1149 S. Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90015, (213) 765-1000, Bar # 146853
Counsel for Respondent: In Pro Per Respondent, Rene Chavez Nunez, 225 Rosemont Boulevard, San Gabriel, CA 91775, (626) 230-9640, Bar# 226171
Submitted to: Assigned Judge – State Bar court Clerk’s Office Los Angeles.
Filed: March 1, 2012.
<<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 July 24, 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):
checked. Costs are added to membership fee for calendar year following effective date of discipline.
<<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.
Case Number(s): 11-O-15095
In the Matter of: Rene Chavez Nunez, State Bar No. 226171
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: Juan Carlos Frigerio
Principal Amount: $790.00
Interest Accrues From: September 13, 2010
2. Payee:
Principal Amount:
Interest Accrues From:
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 the first quarterly report filed with the Office of Probation following the effective date of the Supreme Court order.
<<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.
<<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.
<<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.
IN THE MATTER OF: Rene Chavez Nunez, State Bar No. 226171
STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 11-O-15095
FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
Facts.
1. On or about September 13, 2010, Juan Carlos Frigerio ("Frigerio") hired Respondent to represent him in a bankruptcy under Chapter 7. Frigerio agreed to pay Respondent $500 to begin the bankruptcy, $250 at the 341(a) Meeting, and $250 within 30-days after the 341(a) Meeting. Frigerio made the $500 payment to Respondent.
2. On or about September 27, 2010, Respondent met with Frigerio to have Frigerio sign, inter alia, the "Voluntary Petition of Bankruptcy" ("Voluntary Petition") and "Declaration re: Limited Scope of Appearance Pursuant to Local Bankruptcy Rule 2090-1" ("Declaration") prepared by Respondent. The Declaration stated, inter alia, that Respondent would prepare the Petition and Schedules, represent Frigerio at the 341(a) Meeting, and represent Frigerio at the final discharge hearing.
3. On or about September 29, 2010, Frigerio obtained his Certificate of Counseling and emailed the Certificate to Respondent. Respondent received the Certificate.
4. On or about October 8, 2010, Frigerio made a payment of $290 in cash to Respondent for filing fees. Altogether, Frigerio paid $790 to Respondent.
5. On or about October 29, 2010, Respondent filed, inter alia, the Voluntary Petition and Declaration in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California ("Bankruptcy Court"), in the matter titled In the Matter of Juan C. Frigerio, Bankruptcy Petition No: 6:10-bk-45227-CB ("In re Frigerio").
6. On or about October 31, 2010, the Bankruptcy Court filed and served on Respondent and Frigerio the following documents in In re Frigerio: (A) an "Order to Comply with Bankruptcy Rule 1007 and Notice of Intent to Dismiss Case"; (B) a "Case Commencement Deficiency Notice"; and (C) a "Notice of Requirement to File a Statement of Course In Personal Financial Management." The Order stated that Respondent failed to file Schedules A through J and that the Bankruptcy Court would dismiss the matter if Respondent did not file those schedules within 14-days. The Deficiency Notice listed nine deficiencies. The Notice of Requirement notified Respondent that he must file Frigerio’s Certificate of Completion with 45 days of the 341 (a) Meeting. Respondent and Frigerio received the order and notices.
7. In or about early November 2010, Frigerio spoke with Respondent about the order and notices. Respondent told Frigerio that Respondent would file the schedules, correct the deficiencies, and file the Certificate of Completion. Respondent did not file the schedules, correct the deficiencies, or file the Certificate of Completion.
8. On or about November 18, 2010, the Bankruptcy Court filed and served on Respondent an "Order and Notice of Dismissal for Failure to File Schedules, Statements and/or Plan" that dismissed In re Frigerio. Respondent received the order.
9. On or about January 20, 2011, Frigerio filed a complaint with the State Bar concerning Respondent’s handling of In re Frigerio. Respondent received notice of the complaint from the State Bar.
10. On or about March 17, 2011, the State Bar closed Frigerio’s complaint after assisting the parties in reaching the agreement that Respondent would file a motion to reopen In re Frigerio, pay for the cost of the motion, and obtain the discharge in In re Frigerio. Respondent was aware of the agreement and consented to it.
11. On or about March 23,2011, Frigerio sent an email to Respondent that confirmed the agreement that Respondent would file a motion to reopen In re Frigerio, pay for the cost of the motion, and obtain the discharge in In re Frigerio. Respondent received the email, and Respondent and Frigerio met to discuss the bankruptcy.
12. Between in or about April 2011 and in or about June 2011, Frigerio repeatedly spoke with or emailed Respondent to request that Respondent either file a motion to reopen In re Frigerio or file a new bankruptcy petition. Respondent repeatedly told or emailed Frigerio that Respondent would either file a motion to reopen In re Frigerio or file a new bankruptcy petition.
13. Respondent did not did not file a motion to reopen In re Frigerio or a new bankruptcy petition, and has not communicated with Frigerio since on or about June 2, 2011.
14. Respondent provided no legal services of value to Frigerio. Respondent did not earn any of the advance fees and costs paid by Frigerio. At no time did Respondent refund any portion of the $790 paid by Frigerio.
Conclusions of Law
15. By failing to file the proper pleadings in In re Frigerio, permitting In re Frigerio to be dismissed, failing to file the motion to reopen In re Frigerio, and failing to file a new bankruptcy petition, Respondent intentionally, recklessly or repeatedly failed to perform legal services of competence in wilful violation of Rules of Professional Conduct ("rule"), rule 3-110(A),
16. By not refunding the $790 to Frigerio, Respondent failed to refund promptly any part of a fee paid in advance that has not been earned in wilful violation of rule 3-700(D)(2).
PENDING PROCEEDINGS.
The disclosure date referred to, on page 2, paragraph A(7), was February 2, 2012.
AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.
Standard 1.3 of the "Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct" ("Standard") provides guidance as to the imposition of discipline and interpretation of specific Standards. It states that the primary purpose of discipline is the protection of the public, the courts and the legal profession.
Standard 2.10 provides that culpability of a willful violation of any Rule of Professional Conduct not specified in these standards shall result in 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 set forth in standard 1.3.
In In re Morse (1995) 11 Cal .4th 184, 206, the Supreme Court stated the purpose of disciplinary proceedings are the protection of the public, the courts, and the legal profession, the maintenance of high professional standards by attorneys, and the preservation of public confidence in the legal profession.
The Standards authorize reproval or suspension in this matter. Respondent’s misconduct involved a single client matter and does not establish a pattern. He has stipulated that he failed to perform with competence and thereby cooperated with the State Bar in entering into this Stipulation. Given the extent of the misconduct and the degree of harm to the clients, the appropriate level of discipline is a suspension of one (1) year, stayed upon the condition that he be placed on probation for three (3) years.
COSTS OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.
Respondent acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed Respondent that as of February 2, 2012, the prosecution costs in this matter are $3,018.30. 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.
SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES
Case Number(s): 11-O-15095
In the Matter of: Rene Chavez Nunez, State Bar No.: 226171
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: Rene Chavez Nunez
Date: February 7, 2012
Respondent’s Counsel:
Date:
Deputy Trial Counsel: Adriana M. Burger for Charles T. Calix
Date: February 12, 2012
Case Number(s): 11-O-15095
In the Matter of: Rene Chavez Nunez, State Bar No.: 226171
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 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: Richard A. Platel
Date: February 24, 2012
[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 March 1, 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:
RENE C. NUNEZ
225 ROSEMONT BLVD.
SAN GABRIEL, CA 91775
checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:
CHARLES CALIX, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, California, on March 1, 2012.
Signed by:
Angela Carpenter
Case Administrator
State Bar Court