State Bar Court of California
Hearing Department
STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER
APPROVING
STAYED
SUSPENSION; NO ACTUAL SUSPENSION
Case Number(s): 12-H-17379
In the Matter of: GAYLE ANNE-MARIE GUTEKUNST, Bar # 91826,
A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Christine A. Souhrada, Bar #
228256
Counsel for Respondent: Gayle Anne-Marie Gutekunst, Bar #
91826
Submitted to: Settlement Judge.
Filed: May 2, 2013.
<<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 May 30,
1980 .
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 13 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.
checked. Costs
are to be paid in equal amounts prior to February 1 for the following
membership years: two billing cycles following the effective date of the
Supreme Court order. (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 11-O-14484.
checked. (b) Date prior discipline effective November 2,
2011
checked. (c) Rules of Professional Conduct/ State Bar Act
violations: Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 4- 100(B) (3) [failure to render
appropriate accounts to a client
checked. (d) Degree of prior discipline private reproval
<<not>> checked. (e) If Respondent has two or more
incidents of prior discipline, use space provided below or a separate
attachment entitled “Prior Discipline. .
<<not>> 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.
<<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.
<<not>> checked. (4) Harm:
Respondent's misconduct harmed significantly a client, the public or the
administration of justice.
<<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.
<<not>> checked. (7) Multiple/Pattern
of Misconduct: Respondent's current misconduct evidences multiple acts of
wrongdoing or demonstrates a pattern of misconduct.
<<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.
<<not>> 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.
<<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: See
Attachment at page 11
D. Discipline:
checked. (1) Stayed Suspension:
checked. (a) Respondent must be suspended from the
practice of law for a period of two (2) 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 two years, which will commence upon
the effective date of the Supreme Court order in this matter. (See rule 9.18,
California Rules of Court.)
E. Additional Conditions of Probation:
checked. (1) During the probation
period, Respondent must comply with the provisions of the State Bar Act and
Rules of Professional Conduct.
checked. (2) 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. (3) 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. (4) 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. (5) 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. (6) 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. (7) 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 attended Ethics
School on August 9, 2012, and passed the test given at the end of the session..
<<not>> checked. (8) 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. (9) The
following conditions are attached hereto and incorporated:
<<not>>
checked. Substance Abuse Conditions.
<<not>>
checked. Law Office Management Conditions.
<<not>>
checked. Medical Conditions.
<<not>>
checked. Financial Conditions.
F. Other Conditions Negotiated by the Parties:
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 within one year. 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.
<<not>> checked. No MPRE recommended. Reason: .
checked. (2) Other Conditions: A.
Respondent’s Duty to Initiate and Participate in Fee Arbitration.
Respondent must initiate fee arbitration
within thirty (30) days from the effective date of this matter, including
making any payment(s) and filing fees required by the organization conducting
the fee arbitration to start the process. The fee arbitration will be for the
$32,500 in fees that James and Paula Steinway ("the Steinways") paid
Respondent on January 8, 2008 as detailed in the stipulation in case no.
11-O-14484. Respondent must not request more fees than have already been paid
by, or on behalf of, the Steinways.
Respondent must provide the Office of
Probation with a copy of the conformed filing within forty-five (45) days from
the effective date of this matter. Respondent must immediately provide the
Office of Probation with any information requested regarding the fee
arbitration to verify Respondent’s compliance.
Respondent must fully and promptly
participate in the fee arbitration as directed by the organization conducting
the fee arbitration. Respondent will not be permitted to raise the statute of
limitations as a defense to the fee arbitration. Respondent understands and
agrees that the Office of Probation may contact the entity conducting the fee
arbitration for information.
Respondent must accept binding arbitration
on the arbitration request form. If the arbitration proceeds as non-binding,
however, Respondent must abide by the arbitration award and forego the right to
file an action seeking a trial de novo in court to vacate the award.
B. Disputed Funds Must be Held in Trust by
Respondent
Respondent must keep the disputed funds in a
separate interest-bearing trust account (not an IOLTA). If Respondent has
removed the disputed funds from trust, Respondent must open a separate interest-bearing
trust account and deposit the disputed funds into such account within
fourty-five (45) days from the effective date of discipline. Respondent must
provide evidence, e.g. a copy of Respondent’s bank statement showing that the
disputed funds have been placed in trust within sixty (60) days from the
effective date of this matter, and a statement under penalty of perjury that
the funds have remained in trust with each of Respondent’s quarterly and final
reports.
C. Respondent’s Duty to Comply with the
Arbitration Award
Within fifteen (15) days after issuance of
any arbitration award or judgment or agreement reflected in a stipulated award
issued pursuant to a fee arbitration matter, Respondent must provide a copy of
said award, judgment or stipulated award to the Office of Probation.
Respondent must abide by any award, judgment
or stipulated award of any such fee arbitrator and agrees to provide proof
thereof to the Office of Probation within thirty (30) days after compliance
with any such award, judgment or stipulated award. If the award, judgment or
stipulated award does not set forth a deadline for any payment, Respondent is
to make full payment within thirty (30) days of the issuance of any such award,
judgment or stipulated award. Respondent must provide proof thereof to the
Office of Probation within thirty (30) days after payment.
To the extent that Respondent has paid any
fee arbitration award, judgment or stipulated award prior to the effective date
of this matter, Respondent will be given credit for such payment(s) provided
satisfactory proof of such payment(s) is or has been provided to the Office of
Probation.
D. Fee Arbitration Conditions can be
Satisfied by Respondent’s Full Payment to the Steinways The Fee Arbitration
Conditions can also be satisfied by Respondent’s full payment of $32,500 in
fees that the Steinways paid Respondent on January 8, 2008, plus interest of
10% per annum from July 11, 2009 within thirty (30) days from the effective
date of this matter. Satisfactory proof of payment must be received by the
Office of Probation within forty-five (45) days from the effective date of this
matter.
If the Client Security Fund
("CSF") has reimbursed the Steinways for all or any portion of the
principal amount(s), Respondent must also pay restitution to CSF in the
amount(s) paid, plus applicable interest and costs. To the extent the CSF has
paid only principal amounts, Respondent will still be liable for interest payments
to the Steinways. Any restitution to the CSF is enforceable as provided in
Business and Professions Code section 6140.5, subdivisions (c) and (d).
Respondent must pay all restitution to the Steinways before making payment to SF.
Satisfactory proof of payment(s) to CSF must be received by the Office of
Probation within thirty (30) days of any payment.
E. Effect of Respondent’s Failure to Comply
with Fee Arbitration Conditions
Respondent understands that failure to
strictly comply with these conditions regarding fee arbitration may result
inthis Court imposing additional discipline (with attendant costs) and
conditions upon Respondent, including ordering Respondent to pay back the full
amount of $32,500 paid to Respondent by the Steinways plus 10% interest from
July 11, 2009.
Attachment language (if any): .
ATTACHMENT TO
STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION
IN THE MATTER OF: Gayle Anne-Made Gutekunst, State Bar No. 91826
STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 12-H-17379
FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
Respondent admits that the following facts are true and that she is
culpable of violations of the specified statutes and/or Rules of Professional
Conduct.
Case No. 12-H-17379
FACTS:
1. On September 21, 2011, Respondent signed a stipulation in State Bar case
number 11-O-14484 in which she stipulated to misconduct and agreed to receive a
private reproval and to comply with conditions attached to the reproval for a
period of one year. The conditions attached to the reproval were specified in
the stipulation that Respondent signed.
2. On October 12, 2011, the State Bar Court issued an order imposing a
private reproval upon respondent in case number 11-O-14484. The State Bart
Court order required Respondent to comply with the stipulated conditions
attached to the reproval.
3. On October 12, 2011, the stipulation and order were filed with the State
Bar Court. On that same date, Respondent was served with the order and received
it.
4. By on October 12, 2011 Respondent had actual knowledge of the reproval
conditions and reproval order.
5. The reproval conditions and reproval order became effective on November
2, 2011.
6. PROVIDING THE OFFICE OF PROBATION PROOF THAT LETTER HAS BEEN SENT
OFFERING TO INITIATE FEE ARBITRATION CONDITION:
One of the reproval conditions provided as follows:
"Within 60 days after the effective date of discipline, respondent
will: 1) provide to the Office of Probation proof that she has sent a letter,
by certified mail, to both James and Paula Steinway offering to initiate a fee
arbitration..."
7. Respondent violated this condition of her reproval by failing to timely
provide the Office of Probation proof that she has sent a letter, by certified
mail, to both James and Paula Steinway offering to initiate a fee arbitration
within 60 days after the effective date of discipline. Respondent provided this
proof with her first quarterly report to the Office of Probation; however, this
was 69 days after the effective date of discipline and therefore Respondent was
late in complying with this condition.
8. PROVIDING THE OFFICE OF PROBATION WITH ANY RESPONSE REGARDING THE OFFER
TO ARBITRATE CONDITION:
One of the reproval conditions provided as follows:
"Within 60 days after the effective date of discipline’ respondent
will:... 2) provide the Office of Probation with any response regarding the
offer to arbitrate. Respondent’s letter shall state that James and Paul
Steinway may choose whether the arbitration will be binding or non-binding.
Respondent must abide by the client’s choice regarding whether the arbitration
will be binding or non-binding."
9. Respondent violated this condition of her reproval by failing to timely
provide the Office of Probation with any response regarding the offer to
arbitrate within 60 days after effective date of discipline. Respondent
provided information regarding any response with her first quarterly report to
the Office of Probation; however, this was 69 days after the effective date of
discipline and therefore Respondent was late in complying with this condition.
10. QUARTERLY REPORTING CONDITION
One of the conditions of the reproval required respondent to submit reports
as follows:
"Respondent must submit written quarterly reports to the Office of
Probation on each January 10, April 10, July 10, and October 10 of the
condition period attached to the reproval. 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 the reproval during the preceding
calendar quarter. Respondent must also state in each report 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 thirty (30) days, that report must be submitted on the
next following 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
condition period and no later than the last day of the condition period."
11. Respondent violated this condition by failing to submit the quarterly
report due on April 10, 2012 until June 5, 2012; and by failing to submit the
final report due on November 2, 2012 until January 7, 2013.
12. REPORTING TO THE OFFICE OF PROBATION OF STATUS OF FEE ARBITRATION
CONDITION
One of the conditions of the reproval required respondent to submit reports
as follows:
"With each quarterly report respondent will report to the Office of
Probation whether and when the arbitration is scheduled and the results
thereof."
13. Respondent violated this condition by failing to timely report the
status of the fee arbitration due in her July 10, 2012 and November 2, 2012
reports until October 9, 2012 and January 7, 2013, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
14. By failing to timely provide to the Office of Probation with proof that
she sent a letter, by certified mail, to both James and Paula Steinway offering
to initiate fee arbitration within 60 days of the effective date of discipline;
by failing to timely provide to the Office of Probation with any response
regarding the offer to arbitrate within 60 days of the effective date of
discipline; by failing to timely submit the April 10, 2012 quarterly report; by
failing to submit the November 2, 2012 final report; by failing to timely
report the status of the fee arbitration due July 10, 2012; and by failing to
report the status of the fee arbitration due November 2, 2012, Respondent
failed to comply with conditions attached to her private reproval administered
by the State Bar in wilful violation of Rules of Professional Conduct, rule
1-110.
ADDITIONAL FACTS RE AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES.
Prior Record of Discipline: Respondent has a prior disciplinary matter,
specifically, case no. 11-O-14484, effective November 2, 2011, the matter which
resulted in the private reproval underlying this present matter. In that case
Respondent admitted to culpability for failing to render appropriate accounts
to a client.
ADDITIONAL FACTS RE MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES.
Pretrial Stipulation: Respondent is entitled to mitigation for entering
into a full stipulation with the Office of Chief Trial Counsel prior to trial
in case no. 12-H-17379, thereby saving the State Bar Court time and resources.
(In the Matter of Downey (Review Dept. 2009) 5 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr.
151,156; In the Matter of Van Sickle (Review Dept. 2009) 4 Cal. State Bar Ct.
Rptr. 980, 993-94.) AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.
The Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct provide a
"process of fixing discipline" pursuant to a set of written
principles to "better discharge the purposes of attorney discipline as
announced by the Supreme Court." (Rules Proc. of State Bar, tit. IV, Stds.
for Atty. Sanctions for Prof. Misconduct, Introduction (all further references
to standards are to this source).) The primary purposes of disciplinary
proceedings and of the sanctions imposed 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." (In re Morse (1995) 11 Cal.4th 184, 205; std
1.3.)
Although not binding, the standards are entitled to "great
weight" and should be followed "whenever possible" in
determining level of discipline. (In re Silverton (2005) 36 Cal.4th 81, 92,
quoting In re Brown (1995) 12 Cal.4th 205, 220 and In re Young (1989) 49 Cal.3d
257, 267, fn. 11.) Adherence to the standards in the great majority of cases
serves the valuable purpose of eliminating disparity and assuring consistency,
that is, the imposition of similar attorney discipline for instances of similar
attorney misconduct. (In re Naney (1990) 51 Cal.3d 186, 190.) Any discipline
recommendation different from that set forth in the applicable standards should
clearly explain the reasons for the deviation. (Blair v. State Bar (1989) 49
Cal.3d 762, 776, fn. 5.)
As discussed above, Respondent has one prior record of discipline. Standard
1.7(a) requires that where an attorney is found culpable of professional
misconduct in any proceeding in which discipline may be imposed and the
attorney has a record of one prior imposition of discipline as defined by
standard 1.2(f), 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.
Thus, since Respondent’s prior imposition of discipline was a private
reproval, the discipline imposed in the present matter must be greater.
The discipline applicable to Respondent’s current misconduct is found in
Standard 2.9 which provides that "culpability of a member of a wilful
violation of rule 1-110, Rules of Professional Conduct, shall result in
suspension."
Although Respondent violated multiple terms of her reproval, she has made
efforts to satisfy those terms and has come into compliance. Respondent has participated
in the discipline proceedings and is entering into this stipulation to settle
her disciplinary matter prior to trial, indicating that she appreciates the
seriousness of the charges in the instant proceeding and comprehends the
importance of participating. Respondent is acknowledging the wrongfulness of
her acts through this stipulation. Considering all of these factors,
progressive discipline is warranted, but actual suspension is not necessary to
fulfill the purposes of discipline. Based upon the above-described standards, a
two year stayed suspension accompanied by a one year probationary period serves
the purposes of State Bar discipline.
The stipulated level of discipline is also in line with case law involving
similar misconduct. In Conroy v. State Bar (1990) 51 Cal. 3d 799, the attorney
violated the terms of his reproval and then defaulted in the disciplinary
proceeding. The Court imposed a one year stayed suspension with 60 days actual
suspension, finding that the attorney’s non-compliance with his reproval
conditions and failure to participate in the disciplinary proceedings evidenced
a contemptuous attitude toward the disciplinary proceedings and failure to
acknowledge the wrongfulness of his acts. (ld. at 805-806). In this matter,
these aggravating concerns are not present, as stated above. Thus, the level of
discipline imposed upon Respondent here is properly less than that imposed in
Conroy.
PENDING PROCEEDINGS.
The disclosure date referred to, on page 2, paragraph A(7), was April 17, 2013.
COSTS OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.
Respondent acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has
informed respondent that as of April i7, 2013, the prosecution costs in this
matter are $3,349. 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): 12-H-17379
In the Matter of: GAYLE ANNE-MARIE GUTEKUNST
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: GAYLE ANNE-MARIE GUTEKUNST
Date: 4/22/13
Respondent’s Counsel:
Date:
Deputy Trial Counsel: Christine A. Souhrada
Date:4/22/13
STAYED SUSPENSION ORDER
Case Number(s): 12-H-17379
In the Matter of: GAYLE ANNE-MARIE GUTEKUNST
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: Pat McElroy
Date: 5/2/13
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 San Francisco, on May 2,
2013, 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:
GAYLE ANNE-MARIE GUTEKUNST
1819 POLK ST# 315
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94109
<<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:
CHRISTINE A. SOUHRADA, Enforcement, San Francisco
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in San
Francisco, California, on May 2, 2013.
Signed by:
Bernadette Molina
Case Administrator
State Bar Court