State Bar Court of California
Hearing Department
STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER
APPROVING
ACTUAL SUSPENSION
Case Number(s): 12-O-17026, 12-O-17961
In the Matter of: CYNTHIA L. SPALDING, Bar # 170899, A
Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Timothy G. Byer, Bar # 172472,
Counsel for Respondent: Cynthia L. Spalding, Bar # 170899,
Submitted to: Settlement Judge.
Filed: December 19, 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 June 2,
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 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.
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 10-C-08415,
10-C-10196. See Attachment, page 10, "Aggravating Circumstances.".
checked. (b) Date prior discipline effective August 18,
2012.
<<not>> checked. (c) Rules of Professional Conduct/ State
Bar Act violations: Respondent was disciplined pursuant to Business and
Professions Code sections 6101 and 6102 in connection with four misdemeanor
convictions.
checked. (d) Degree of prior discipline One year of stayed
suspension, five years of probation, and attendance at Alcoholics Anonymous
and/or The Other Bar.
<<not>> checked. (e) If Respondent has two or more incidents
of prior discipline, use space provided below. .
<<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.
checked. (7) Multiple/Pattern of Misconduct: Respondent's current
misconduct evidences multiple acts of wrongdoing or demonstrates a pattern of
misconduct. See Attachment, page 10, "Aggravating Circumstances."
<<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: Pretrial Stipulation. See Attachment, page 10, "Mitigating
Circumstances."
D. Discipline:
checked. (1) Stayed Suspension:
checked. (a) Respondent must be suspended from the practice of law for a
period of two 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: .
checked. (b) The above-referenced suspension is stayed.
checked. (2) Probation: Respondent must be placed on probation for a
period of three 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 90 days.
<<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: .
E. Additional Conditions of Probation:
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.
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.
<<not>> checked. No Ethics School recommended. Reason: .
<<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.
checked.
(10) The following conditions are attached hereto and
incorporated:
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 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.
<<not>> checked. No MPRE recommended. Reason: .
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: .
checked. (5) Other
Conditions: .
Substance Abuse Conditions of Probation
1. During the probation period, Respondent must continually participate
in the Lawyer Assistance Program ("LAP"), and comply with all
provisions and conditions of LAP, including her Participation Plan During
Evaluation, her Participation Agreement/Plan, or any other Plan or Agreement or
modification to any such Plan or Agreement (the "Plan") which is in
effect at any time during the probation period.
2. Within thirty (30) days of commencing participation in the Plan or
any modifications thereof, Respondent must provide a complete copy of the Plan
and any modifications to the Office of Probation.
3. Withdrawal or termination from LAP, whether voluntary or
involuntary, is a violation of this condition.
4. Within ten (10) days of signing this Stipulation, Respondent must
provide a complete copy of this Stipulation to LAP and the LAP Evaluation
Committee, and obtain a letter from LAP acknowledging its receipt of the
Stipulation.
5. Within thirty (30) days of signing this Stipulation, Respondent must
provide a complete copy of this Stipulation to the Office of Probation.
6. Within thirty (30) days of the effective date of discipline,
Respondent shall sign and return to the Office of Probation the written
waiver/authorization provided to her by the Office of Probation authorizing LAP
to provide all information and all documents in its possession regarding
Respondent to the Office of Probation, the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel,
and the State Bar Court, including but not limited to the terms and conditions
of the Plan, any subsequent modifications to the Plan as they may occur during Respondent’s
period of probation, and Respondent’s compliance or failure to comply with the
Plan (the "LAP Waiver").
7. Any revocation of the LAP Waiver by Respondent shall constitute a
violation of probation and Respondent must report such revocation in writing to
the Office of Probation within five (5) days of revocation.
8. Respondent shall report in writing, and under penalty of perjury,
any incident of non-compliance with the terms and conditions of the Plan to the
Office of Probation within five (5) days of its occurrence.
9. Respondent shall report her compliance and/or non-compliance with
the terms and conditions of the Plan in each written quarterly and final report
to the Office of Probation required by this discipline, as set forth in the
Additional Conditions of Probation, Section E(4) at page 4 ("Section
E(4)").
10. No later than 10 days before a quarterly report or the final report
is due as required by Section E(4), Respondent shall provide LAP with written
authorization instructing LAP to provide its own separate written quarterly
report regarding Respondent’s compliance and/or non-compliance with the terms
and conditions of the Plan to the Office of Probation to be received by the
Office of Probation no later than each January 10, April 10, July 10, and
October 10, as well as a final LAP report that will be due on the same date
that Respondent’s final report is due as required by Section E(4).
11. Participation in LAP shall be at Respondent’s sole expense.
12. Failure to comply with these Substance Abuse Conditions is a
violation of Respondent’s probation.
Attachment language (if
any):.
ATTACHMENT TO
STIPULATION RE FACTS,
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION
IN THE MATTER OF: CYNTHIA
L. SPALDING, State Bar No. 170899
STATE BAR COURT CASE
NUMBER: 12-O-17026,12-O-17961
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-O-17026
(Complainant: Marc Grossman)
FACTS:
1. Respondent has been
suspended from the practice of law since September 28, 2013, due to her failure
to take and pass the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination as
required in connection with professional discipline. Respondent received notice
of the suspension prior to its effective date.
2. On October 4, 2012,
while Respondent was not entitled to practice law and knowing she was not
entitled to practice law, Respondent signed and filed with the Workers
Compensation Appeals Board ("WCAB") a Substitution of Attorney,
pursuant to which she became attorney of record for an applicant in a matter
pending before the WCAB.
3. On October 12, 2012,
while Respondent was not entitled to practice law and knowing she was not
entitled to practice law, Respondent appeared in San Bernardino County Superior
Court on behalf of a defendant in a civil matter (the "civil
matter").
4. Prior to the September
28, 2013, suspension from practice, Respondent maintained an internet web site
(www.inlandlawgroup.com) for her law firm, Inland Law Group. The website described
Respondent as the owner of Inland Law Group, included Respondent’s professional
profile, and advertised her availability as an attorney for legal
representation. Respondent permitted the website to remain up and unchanged
following her suspension from practice until at least October 29, 2012.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
5. By signing and filing
the Substitution of Attorney in the WCAB matter, and by appearing in court in
the Civil Matter, and by advertising herself as an attorney and as the owner of
Inland Law Group on that law firm’s website, Respondent failed to support the
Constitution and laws of the United States and of this State, in willful
violation of Business and Professions Code, section 6068(a), by practicing law
and holding herself out as entitled to practice law when she was not an active
member of the State Bar, in willful violation of Business and Professions Code
section 6125 and 6126.
6. By signing and filing
the Substitution of Attorney in the WCAB matter, and by appearing in court in
the civil matter, and by advertising herself as an attorney and as the owner of
Inland Law Group on that law firm’s website with knowledge that she had been
suspended from the practice of law, Respondent committed an act of moral
turpitude, dishonesty or corruption in willful violation of Business and
Professions Code, section 6106.
Case No. 12-O-17961
(Complainants: Lawrence and Pennie Gomez)
FACTS:
7. On March 5, 2010,
Lawrence and Pennie Gomez employed Respondent to represent them in a Chapter 7
bankruptcy matter.
8. From September 2010
until September 2012, the Gomezes called Respondent approximately 20 times,
requesting the status of their matter. On each occasion., the Gomezes either
left a message with Respondent’s employee, or left a voice mail message requesting
a returned call. Respondent received all the messages but returned none of
them.
9. On November 20, 2012,
the Gomezes made a complaint to the State Bar.
10. On December 18, 2012,
and again on January 3, 2013, a State Bar investigator mailed letters to
Respondent, both of which she received, in which the investigator requested a
written response by Respondent to the Gomezes’ allegations of misconduct, by
January 3, 2013, and by January 17, 2013, respectively. Respondent did not
respond in writing to either letter.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
11. By not returning any
of the Gomezes’ messages seeking the status of their matter, Respondent failed
to respond promptly to reasonable status inquiries of a client in a matter in
which Respondent had agreed to provide legal services, in willful violation of
Business and Professions Code, section 6068(m).
12. By not responding in
writing to the State Bar investigator’s letters, Respondent failed to cooperate
and participate in a disciplinary investigation pending against Respondent, in
willful violation of Business and Professions Code, section 6068(i).
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES.
Prior Record of
Discipline: Respondent has been a member of the State Bar since June 2, 1994,
and has been disciplined on one prior occasion.
Effective August 18, 2012,
the California Supreme Court ordered that Respondent be suspended from the
practice of law in California for one year, that execution of the suspension be
stayed, and that she be placed on probation for five years. The discipline resulted
from Respondent’s misconduct in case numbers 10-C-08415 and 10-C-10196.
Case number 10-C-08415 was
a conviction referral matter involving Respondent’s convictions for driving
with an excessively high blood alcohol content. On April 29, 2012, Respondent
pled guilty to violation of Vehicle Code section 23152(b) (driving with 0.08 or
more blood alcohol) arising from an arrest on August 7, 2009, pled no contest
to another violation of 23152(b) arising from an arrest on September 23, 2009,
and pled guilty to a third violation of 23152(b) arising from an arrest on
October 28, 2009.
Case number 10-C-10196 was
a second conviction referral matter involving Respondent’s, conviction of a
violation of Vehicle Code, section 14601.2(a)(driving with a suspended license)
arising from an arrest on February 9, 2010.
Multiple Acts of
Wrongdoing (Std. 1.2(b)(ii): Respondent failed to respond to the Gomezes’
reasonable status inquiries, failed to cooperate in the State Bar’s
investigation of the Gomezes’ allegations, and engaged in the unauthorized
practice of law.
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES.
Pre-trial Stipulation:
Respondent is entitled to mitigation for entering into a full stipulation with
the Office of Chief Trial Counsel prior to trial, thereby saving 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. 2006) 4
Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 980, 993-994.)
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.)
In this case, Respondent
did not respond to approximately 20 reasonable status inquiries from her
clients, the Gomezes, from their employment of her in May 2010 until they
stopped trying to contact her in September 2012, and did not respond in writing
to the State Bar’s investigation of the Gomezes’ complaint. In addition,
Respondent, while suspended from practice for failing to comply with a court
order that she take and pass the Multistate Professional Responsibility
Examination, held herself out as eligible to practice law at a time when she
knew she was not so entitled. This is serious misconduct.
Standard 1.6(a) requires
that where a respondent acknowledges two acts of misconduct and different
sanctions are prescribed by the standards that apply to those acts, the
sanction shall be the more or most severe of the different applicable
standards. Here, the most severe standard applicable is standard 2.3, which
provides that culpability of an attorney for an act of moral turpitude, shall
result in actual suspension or disbarment depending upon the extent to which
the victim of the misconduct is harmed or misled and depending upon the
magnitude of the act of misconduct and the degree to which it relates to the
attorney’s acts within the practice of law. Standard 2.3 applies to
Respondent’s practicing law and holding herself out as entitled to practice law
when she knew she was not so entitled.
As discussed above, Respondent’s
misconduct in these two matters constitutes serious and multiple acts of
misconduct, including moral turpitude. Further, Respondent’s prior record of
discipline is a serious aggravating factor. Standard 1.7(a) provides that, if
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, 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.
Respondent’s prior
discipline was neither "minimal in severity" nor "remote in
time" from the current misconduct, and included one year of stayed
suspension. Accordingly, pursuant to standard 1.7(a), a level of discipline
greater than one year stayed suspension is warranted for Respondent’s current
misconduct, and according to standard 2.3, the level of discipline must include
a period of actual suspension.
Considering the magnitude
of the misconduct, the direct connection between the misconduct and
Respondent’s practice of law, and taking into account all aggravating and
mitigating circumstances, the level of discipline stipulated to herein,
including an actual suspension from the practice of law for 90 days, is
appropriate to serve the purposes of attorney discipline.
COSTS OF DISCIPLINARY
PROCEEDINGS.
Respondent acknowledges
that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed her that as of November
21, 2013, the prosecution costs in this matter total approximately $3,779.
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 State Bar Ethics
School, State Bar Client Trust Accounting School, and/or any other educational
course(s) to be ordered as a condition of reproval or suspension. (Rules Proc.
of State Bar, rule 3201.)
SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES
Case Number(s):
12-O-17206, 12-O-17961
In the Matter of: CYNTHIA
L. SPALDING
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: CYNTHIA L.
SPALDING
Date: 12/4/13
Respondent’s Counsel:
Date:
Deputy Trial Counsel:
Timothy G. Byer
Date: 12/4/13
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 December 19, 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 Los Angeles, California, addressed as follows:
CYNTHIA L. SPALDING
LAW OFFICE OF SPALDING
& SPALDING
PO BOX 9059
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91701
<<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:
TIMOTHY BYER, Enforcement,
Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the
foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, California, on December
19, 2013.
Signed by:
Johnnie Lee Smith
Case Administrator
State Bar Court