Attorney Licensee Profile
Marlene Gerdts #93815
License Status: Not Eligible to Practice Law (Discipline w/actual suspension)
Address: PO Box 3834, Beverly Hills, CA 90212-0834
County: Los Angeles County
Phone Number: (310) 490-7679
Fax Number: Not Available
Email: Not Available
Law School: U of San Francisco SOL; San Francisco CA
State Bar Court Cases
The listing below is partial, as the State Bar Court is transitioning to online dockets. Please refer to the License Status, Disciplinary and Administrative History section above for a record of discipline cases. Case dockets and documents may be available using the State Bar Court Search for a Case feature.
Summaries from the California Bar Journal are based on discipline orders but are not the official records. Not all discipline actions have associated CBJ summaries. Copies of official licensee discipline records are available upon request.
January 22, 2004
MARLENE GERDTS [#93815], 57, of Beverly Hills was suspended for three years, stayed, placed on four years of probation with a two-year actual suspension and was ordered to make restitution, prove her rehabilitation and comply with rule 955. The order took effect Jan. 22, 2004.The State Bar Court review department upheld most of a hearing judge’s findings that in three separate cases, Gerdts failed to promptly refund unearned fees, perform legal services competently, keep clients informed of significant developments in their cases or respond to their status inquiries, and she engaged in conduct involving moral turpitude, commingled funds in her trust account and used the trust account to pay business and personal expenses.In the first case, a client retained Gerdts and paid her $10,000 to handle his divorce. When he was unsuccessful in contacting her, he hired another attorney to handle the dissolution and get his money back. Gerdts did not respond to the new lawyer, but when the client complained to the State Bar, she said she had provided the client with a billing statement and gave him a check for $4,315 for unearned fees. The client said he never received either.Another firm was hired later to retrieve the fees and file the divorce. She eventually paid the client $3,000 after claiming the client never cashed the check for $4,315 and admitting she cashed it.Another client hired Gerdts to file a medical malpractice claim. She did so but then sought to file an amended complaint. When the amended complaint was not filed, the court dismissed the case and entered a judgment against Gerdts’ client. Six months later, Gerdts told the client the case probably would be dismissed but said she would try to pursue it. She said she’d handed the case off to someone else who didn’t file the papers on time.The client sued Gerdts and won a default judgment of $500,000.Gerdts also wrote checks against insufficient funds in her client trust account and deposited personal and client funds in the account. The court found she also used her trust account to hide more than $79,000 from creditors.In mitigation, Gerdts practiced law for 15 years without discipline, performed pro bono work for several juveniles and presented testimony of her good character.
The State Bar Court began posting public discipline documents online in 2005. The format and pagination of documents posted on this site may vary from the originals in the case file as a result of their translation from the original format into Word and PDF. Copies of additional related documents in a case are available upon request. On May 31, 2019, the State Bar Court launched online case dockets. If a case was open or filed on or after Feb 7, 2019, documents are being added online as events occur, and can be accessed with the new Search for a Case feature. Older case records are available on request.
NOTE: Only Published Opinions may be cited or relied on as precedent in State Bar Court proceedings. For further information about a case that is displayed here, please refer to the State Bar Court's online docket (Search for a Case).
DISCLAIMER: Any posted Notice of Disciplinary Charges, Conviction Transmittal or other initiating document, contains only allegations of professional misconduct. The licensee is presumed to be innocent of any misconduct warranting discipline until the charges have been proven.