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-O-10006

In the Matter of: BRIDGET LYNN TRACY, Bar # 171772, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).

Counsel For The State Bar: R. Kevin Bucher, Bar #132003

Counsel for Respondent: BRIDGET LYNN TRACY Bar #171772

Submitted to: Settlement Judge

Filed: March 28, 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 October 24, 1994.

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 11 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: three billing cycles (2014, 2015, and 2016) 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.

<<not>> checked. (1) Prior record of discipline [see standard 1.2(f)].

<<not>> checked. (a) State Bar Court case # of prior case .

<<not>> checked. (b) Date prior discipline effective

<<not>> checked. (c) Rules of Professional Conduct/ State Bar Act violations: 

<<not>> checked. (d) Degree of prior discipline 

<<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.

checked. (4)    Harm:  Respondent's misconduct harmed significantly a client, the public or the administration of justice. See Attacment at Page 8.

<<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: (Effective .

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 Pages 8 and 9.

D. Discipline:

checked. (1)    Stayed Suspension:

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

<<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.

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.

<<not>> checked. No Ethics School recommended.  Reason: .

<<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.

checked. (9)    The following conditions are attached hereto and incorporated:      

<<not>> checked. Substance Abuse Conditions.

<<not>> checked. Law Office Management Conditions.

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: .

<<not>> checked. (2) Other Conditions: .

Attachment language (if any): .

MEDICAL CONDITIONS

Case Number(s): 12-O-10006

In the Matter of: Bridget Lynn Tracy

 

checked. a. Unless Respondent has been terminated from the Lawyer Assistance Program (“LAP”) prior to respondent’s successful completion of the LAP, respondent must comply with all provisions and conditions of respondent’s Participation Agreement with the LAP and must provide an appropriate waiver authorizing the LAP to provide the Office of Probation and this court with information regarding the terms and conditions of respondent’s participation in the LAP and respondent’s compliance or non-compliance with LAP requirements. Revocation of the written waiver for release of LAP information is a violation of this condition. However, if respondent has successfully completed the LAP, respondent need not comply with this condition.

<<not>> checked. b. Respondent must obtain psychiatric or psychological help/treatment from a duly licensed psychiatrist, psychologist, or clinical social worker at respondent’s own expense a minimum of  times per month and must furnish evidence to the Office of Probation that respondent is so complying with each quarterly report. Help/treatment should commence immediately, and in any event, no later than thirty (30) days after the effective date of the discipline in this matter. Treatment must continue for  days or  months or  years or, the period of probation or until a motion to modify this condition is granted and that ruling becomes final.

 

If the treating psychiatrist, psychologist, or clinical social worker determines that there has been a substantial change in respondent’s condition, respondent or Office of the Chief Trial Counsel may file a motion for modification of this condition with the Hearing Department of the State Bar Court, pursuant to rule 5.300 of the Rules of Procedure of the State Bar. The motion must be supported by a written statement from the psychiatrist, psychologist, or clinical social worker, by affidavit or under penalty of perjury, in support of the proposed modification.

checked. c. Upon the request of the Office of Probation, respondent must provide the Office of Probation with medical waivers and access to all of respondent’s medical records. Revocation of any medical waiver is a violation of this condition. Any medical records obtained by the Office of Probation are confidential and no information concerning them or their contents will be given to anyone except members of the Office of Probation, Office of the Chief Trial Counsel, and the State Bar Court, who are directly involved with maintaining, enforcing or adjudicating this condition.

Other: 

ATTACHMENT TO

STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION

 

IN THE MATTER OF: BRIDGET LYNN TRACY, State Bar No. 171772

STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 12-O-10006

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. 12-0-10006 (Complainant: Mary Dobell)

FACTS:

1. On September 20, 2011, Respondent made a 911 call to the Huntington Beach Police Department, falsely reporting that Mary Dobell was at the home of James Paulus, that Dobell was going to stab Taulus, and requesting the police go to the residence and intervene.

2. As a result of the call, the police went to the residence of Taulus and questioned Dobell. The police determined the 911 call was a false report.

3. At the time she made the call, Respondent knew that the information she reported to the 911 operator was not true.

4. Respondent later admitted that she had a longstanding, disagreeable, interpersonal relationship with Mary Dobell, which included a mutual involvement with James Paulus.

5. When questioned by the police, and in the course of the State Bar investigation, Respondent admitted to making the call, acting out of anger, and in bad judgment, after having consumed too much alcohol.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:

1. By knowingly making a false report to the Huntington Beach Police Department, Respondent committed an act involving moral turpitude, dishonesty or corruption in willful violation of Business and Profession Code section 6106.

ADDITIONAL FACTS RE AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES.

Standard 1.2(b)(iv) - Harm to the Administration of Justice - By making a false report requiring a criminal investigation, Respondent utilized law enforcement time and resources that should have been expended for legitimate purposes and thereby her actions harmed the administration of justice. (See, e.g., In the Matter of Dixon (Review Dept. 1999) 4 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 23.)

ADDITIONAL FACTS RE MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES.

No Prior Discipline: Although the present misconduct was serious, Respondent has no prior misconduct over the course of 18 years of practice. (See In the Matter of Riordan (Review Dept. 2007) 5 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 41.)

Candor and Cooperation: Before the State Bar investigation was commenced, upon being confronted by the police, Respondent admitted her misconduct and expressed remorse for her wrong doing. Respondent also cooperated with the State Bar in executing the present stipulation. (See In the Matter of Duxbury (Review Dept. 1999) 4 Cal State Bar Ct. Rptr. 61.)

Rehabilitation: Respondent has admitted that at the time she committed the misconduct she was heavily intoxicated, following years of alcohol and substance abuse, which caused her to use poor judgment in making the false 911 call. Respondent has remained alcohol and drug free since September 29, 2011. Respondent voluntarily entered into the Lawyers Assistant Program (LAP) in April 2012 to address her alcohol addiction, which was at the root of her actions giving rise to the present disciplinary action. (See In the Matter of Deierling (Review Dept. 1991) 1 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 552, 560.

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.)

Standard 2.3 provides that acts involving moral turpitude, in violation of Business and Professions Code section 6106, shall result in actual suspension or disbarment depending upon the magnitude of the act of misconduct and the degree to which it relates to the member’s acts within the practice of law.

In this matter, Respondent’s action of making a false police report evidences serious misconduct, Her misconduct was the result of a long battle with alcohol addiction. The present mitigating factors, particularly Respondent’s independent efforts toward rehabilitation by entering LAP, deserves substantial consideration. To a lesser extent, Respondent’s admission to her misconduct in the investigation following the incident does exhibit some limited candor and cooperation, with both law enforcement and the State Bar. Given the mitigating and aggravating circumstances set forth above, there is clear justification for deviating from the level of discipline recommended by Standard 2.3. (See Blair v. State Bar, supra, 49 Cal.3d 762, 776-777.)

The proper level of discipline, in furtherance of 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, is one year suspension, stayed, and two years’ probation.

PENDING PROCEEDINGS.

The disclosure date referred to, on page 2, paragraph A(7), was February 28, 2013.

COSTS OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.

Respondent acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed respondent that as of September 20, 2013, the prosecution costs in this matter are $2,865.00. 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.

EXCLUSION FROM MCLE CREDIT

Pursuant to rule 3201, Respondent may not receive MCLE credit for completion of the State Bar Ethics School. (Rules Proc. of State Bar, rule 3201 .)

SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES

Case Number(s): 12-0-10006

In the Matter of: Bridget Lynn Tracy

 

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: Bridget Lynn Tracy

Date: 3/2/13

 

Respondent’s Counsel:

Date:

 

Deputy Trial Counsel: R, Kevin Bucher

Date:3/14/13

STAYED SUSPENSION ORDER

Case Number(s): 12-O-10006

In the Matter of: Bridget Lynn Tracy

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: George E. Scott

Date: 3/28/13

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 Los Angeles, on March 28, 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:

BRIDGET L. TRACY

7561 QUIET COVE CIR

HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648

 

<<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:

Ronald K. Bucher, ENFORCEMENT/LOS ANGELES

 

I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, California, on March 28, 2013.

 

Signed by:

Johnnie Lee Smith

Case Administrator

State Bar Court