Case Number(s): 12-O-11670
In the Matter of: Arthur Greenspan, Bar # 150216, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Kim Kasreliovieh
Anthony Garcia
State Bar of California
Office of the Chief Trial Counsel
1149 S. Hill Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015
(213)765-1000
Bar # 261766 - Ms. Kasreliovich
171419 - Mr. Garcia
Counsel for Respondent: In Pro Per Respondent
Arthur Greenspan
16610 Calle Brittany
Pacific Palisades, CA 90272
(323) 646-7544
Bar# 150216
Submitted to: Settlement Judge – State Bar Court Clerk’s Office Los Angeles.
<<not>> checked. PREVIOUS STIPULATION REJECTED
Note: All information required by this form and any additional information which cannot be provided in the space provided, must be set forth in an attachment to this stipulation under specific headings, e.g., "Facts," "Dismissals," "Conclusions of Law," "Supporting Authority," etc.
1. Respondent is a member of the State Bar of California, admitted December 4, 1990.
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 10 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.
checked. Costs are to be paid in equal amounts prior to February 1 for the following membership years: three billing cycles following the effective date of the Supreme Court Order. See pages 9-10 for a further discussion of costs. (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.
During Respondent’s probationary period his ex-wife died of cancer and Respondent assumed full custody of their two teenage children. Respondent has expressed that this was a tragedy for the whole family. Respondent has been spending a considerable amount of time caring for his children and helping them through the grieving process. The needs of Respondent’s family have included taking the children to and from the hospital, to multiple therapy appointments, making end of life arrangements, and helping the children cope with the loss of their mother. Respondent also has experienced his own profound grief. The family stress and added responsibilities have consumed Respondent and interfered with Respondent’s ability to timely comply with Probation.
IN THE MATTER OF: Arthur Greenspan, State Bar No. 150216
STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 12-O-11670
FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Respondent, Arthur Greenspan ("Respondent") admits that the following facts are true and that he is culpable of violating the specified statute.
Case No. 12-O-11670 (State Bar Investigation)
FACTS:
1. On September 8, 2009, Respondent entered into a Stipulation Re Facts, Conclusions of Law and Disposition ("Stipulation") with the State Bar of California in Case Nos. 05-O-00569 and 07-O-13832.
2. On September 22, 2009, the Hearing Department of the State Bar Court filed an Order Approving the Stipulation and recommending to the California Supreme Court the discipline set forth in the Stipulation.
3. On September 22, 2009, the Hearing Department’s September 22, 2009 Order Approving the Stipulation was properly served by mail upon Respondent. Respondent received the order.
4. On January 22, 2010, the California Supreme Court filed an Order in Case No. S178061 (State Bar Court Case Nos. 05-0-00569 and 07-0-13832) that Respondent be suspended from the practice of law for one (1) year, that execution of the suspension be stayed, and that Respondent be placed on probation for two (2) years subject to the conditions of probation recommended by the Hearing Department of the State Bar Court in its September 22, 2009 Order regarding the Stipulation, including the condition that the Respondent be actually suspended for thirty (30) days ("Disciplinary Order").
5. Pursuant to the Disciplinary Order, Respondent was ordered to comply with the following terms and conditions of probation, among others:
a. to comply with the State Bar Act and the Rules of Professional Conduct during the period of probation;
b. to submit to the Office of Probation written quarterly reports each January 10, Respondent: Greenspath Arthur Actual Suspension Attachment to Stipulation April 10, July 10, and October 10 of each year or part thereof during which the probation is in effect, certifying under penalty of perjury whether he has complied with all provisions of the State Bar Act and the Rules of Professional Conduct and all terms of probation during the preceding calendar quarter or part thereof covered by the report and to file a final report no earlier than twenty (20) days prior to the expiration of the probation period and no later than the last day of said period;
c. to pay restitution in the amount of $500.00 to Eugenia Oxley not later than 30 days from the effective date of the Disciplinary Order, or on or before March 23, 2010;
d. if Respondent possessed client funds, to provide a certificate from Respondent and/or a certified public accountant or other financial professional approved by the Office of Probation ("CPA report") or if Respondent held no client funds or property during the previous quarter, Respondent must so state under penalty of perjury.
6. On January 22, 2010, the Clerk of the California Supreme Court properly served upon Respondent a copy of the Disciplinary Order. Respondent received the Disciplinary Order.
7. The Disciplinary Order became effective thirty (30) days after filing, on February 21,2010.
8. On February 19, 2010, a Probation Deputy of the Office of Probation ("Probation") of the State Bar of California sent a letter to Respondent. In the letter, the Probation Deputy reminded Respondent of the terms and conditions of his probation imposed pursuant to the Disciplinary Order. In the February 19, 2010 letter, the Probation Deputy specifically reminded Respondent regarding his obligations to file quarterly probation and protection of client funds reports, with the first due on April 10, 2010, and to make restitution to Eugenia Oxley by March 23, 2010. Enclosed with the February 19, 2010 letter were, among other things, copies of the Disciplinary Order, the relevant portion of the Stipulation setting forth the conditions of Respondent’s probation, a Quarterly Report Instruction sheet, and a Quarterly Report form specially tailored for Respondent to use in submitting his quarterly reports. Respondent received the February 19, 2010 letter.
9. Respondent did not file timely with Probation seven out of nine quarterly reports and seven out of nine CPA reports or statements under penalty of perjury that he possessed no client funds for the reporting periods. Respondent’s lack of compliance for quarterly and CPA reports was as follows:
REPORTING PERIOD: April 1 to June 30, 2010, DUE DATE: July 10, 2010, FILING DATE: October 13, 2010
REPORTING PERIOD: October 1 to December 31, 2010, DUE DATE: January 10, 2011, FILING DATE: February 17, 2011
REPORTING PERIOD: January 1 to March 30, 2011, DUE DATE: April 10, 2011, FILING DATE: April 13, 2011
REPORTING PERIOD: April 1 to June 30, 2011, DUE DATE: July 10, 2011, FILING DATE: May 8, 2012
REPORTING PERIOD: July 1 to September 30, 2011, DUE DATE: October 10, 2011, FILING DATE: May 8, 2012
REPORTING PERIOD: October 1 to December 31, 2011, DUE DATE: January 10, 2012, FILING DATE: May 8, 2012
REPORTING PERIOD: January 1 to February 12, 2012, DUE DATE: February 12, 2011, FILING DATE: May 8, 2012
10. Respondent did not file proof with Probation that he had completed restitution to Eugenia Oxley by the due date of March 23, 2010. Respondent filed proof with Probation that he had completed restitution to Eugenia Oxley on February 17, 2011.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
By not timely filing with Probation seven out of nine quarterly reports and CPA reports or statements under penalty of perjury that he possessed no client funds and by not timely filing proof of completion of restitution payments by the due date of March 23, 2010 Respondent willfully failed to comply with all conditions attached to any probation in violation of Business and Professions Code section 6068(k).
PENDING PROCEEDINGS
The disclosure date referred to, on page 2, paragraph A(7), was May 22, 2012.
AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE
Standard 1.7(b) provides that if a member is found culpable of professional misconduct in any proceeding in which discipline may be imposed and the member has a record of two prior impositions of discipline as defined by Standard 1.2(0, the degree of discipline in the current proceeding shall be disbarment unless the most compelling circumstances clearly mitigate.
Standard 2.6 culpability of violating Business and Professions Code, sections 6067 through 6068 and/or sections 6103 through 6105 shall result in disbarment or suspension depending on the gravity of the offense or harm to the victim with due regard to the purposes of imposing discipline set forth in standard 1.3.
While Standard 1.7(b) calls for disbarment where a member has two prior records of discipline, in this case the mitigating circumstances outlined on page *** consitute most compelling mitigating circumstances that clearly mitigate Respondent’s misconduct. Moreover, while Respondent’s compliance was repeatedly untimely, he did eventually comply with the relevant conditions.
In Matter of Laden (2004) 4 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 678, Respondent Laden was disciplined for failure to pay a medical provider and trust account violations. During the pendency of his probation he was untimely in filing seven of his nine quarterly reports and nineteen out of Respondent: Greenspan, Arthur Actual Suspension twenty-seven restitution payments. Respondent also had three priors including a probation violation incurred during the same period of probation. In mitigation the court considered
Respondent’s serious financial hardship, candor, and good faith efforts to pay restitution. The Review Department imposed ninety-days actual suspension and until restitution was paid in full.
COSTS OF DISCIPLINE PROCEEDINGS
Respondent acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed respondent that as of 05-22-2012, the prosecution costs in this matter are $2,900. The costs are to be paid in equal amounts prior to February 1 for the three billing cycles following the effective date of the Supreme Court Order. 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.
If Respondent fails to pay any installment within the time provided herein or as may be modified by the State Bar Court pursuant to section 6086.10, subdivision (c), the remaining balance of the costs is due and payable immediately and enforceable both as provided in Business and Professions Code section 6140.7 and as a money judgment unless relief has been granted under the Rules of Procedure of the State Bar of California. (Rules Proc. of State Bar, rule 5.134.)
SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES
Case Number(s): 12-O-11670
In the Matter of: Arthur Greenspan, State Bar No.: 150216
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: Arthur Greenspan
Date: July 26, 2012
Respondent’s Counsel: Kim G. Kasreliovich
Date: July 27, 2012
Deputy Trial Counsel: Anthony J. Garcia
Date: July 27, 2012
Case Number(s): 12-O-11670
In the Matter of: Arthur Greenspan, State Bar No.: 150216
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 1 – Section A.(3) – DELETE “10 Pages.” INSERT “11 Pages.
Page 2 – Section A. (8) – INSERT AFTER – “Three Billing Cycles” the following, “Years 2014, 2015, and 2016.”
Page 9 – 4th Line – Directly Under “Due Date,” – DELETE “February 12, 2001” and INSERT – “February 12, 2012”
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: August 8, 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 August 9, 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:
ARTHUR GREENSPAN
LAW OFFICE OF ARTHUR GREENSPAN
814 S. WESTGATE AVENUE, STE. 123
BRENTWOOD, CA 90049
checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:
KIMBERLY KASRELIOVICH, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, California, on August 9, 2012.
Signed by:
Angela Carpenter
Case Administrator
State Bar Court