Home > Public >  Attorney Search > Attorney Profile

Attorney Search

Michael Howard Crosby - #125778

Current Status:  Not eligible to practice law (Not Entitled)

See below for more details.

Profile Information

The following information is from the official records of The State Bar of California.

Bar Number: 125778    
Address: 4813 Pescadero Ave
San Diego, CA 92107
Phone Number: (619) 888-5128
Fax Number: Not Available
e-mail: ehraj@pflt.govyttgqu@ndydl.netrjwmamh@sbkiubir.edulwathecf@drfih.orgglccotwnb@adun.orgbaei@lquqihai.govtngpg@mfi.orgociwns@nanwr.netipkeukdu@pfpuope.edudemkecyfh@lmiuqow.netwqpr@rsnyus.orgcrosbymichael51@gmail.comlstgdb@fgcjd.govgiwmkqe@weqbiw.govauatriau@gywtew.eduskcccatff@gsika.comnyei@pomul.orgimgpq@kulo.govdbiway@fdqe.orguokeiob@sskhhm.com 
County: San Diego
Undergraduate School: No Information Available;
District: District 4    
Sections: None Law School: Western State Univ; CA

Status History

Effective Date Status Change
Present Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA
7/1/2016 Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA  
9/28/2014 Active  
9/28/2013 Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA  
4/27/2012 Active  
12/22/2011 Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA  
12/15/1986 Admitted to The State Bar of California

Explanation of member status

Actions Affecting Eligibility to Practice Law in California

Effective DateDescriptionCase NumberResulting Status

Disciplinary and Related Actions

Overview of the attorney discipline system.

1/15/2014 Discipline w/actual suspension 13-PM-13809 Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA 
1/13/2014 Suspended, failed to pass Prof.Resp.Exam 11-O-13513 Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA 
9/28/2013 Ordered inactive 13-PM-13809 Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA 
7/12/2013 Petition/Application/Motion filed in SBCt 13-PM-13809  
11/16/2012 Discipline, probation; no actual susp. 11-O-13513  
12/22/2011 Ordered inactive 11-O-13513 Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA 

Administrative Actions

7/1/2016 Admin Inactive/MCLE noncompliance Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA 

Copies of official attorney discipline records are available upon request.

Explanation of common actions

State Bar Court Cases

NOTE: 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. Only Opinions designated for publication in the State Bar Court Reporter 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, which can be found at: http://apps.statebarcourt.ca.gov/dockets/dockets.aspx

DISCLAIMER: Any posted Notice of Disciplinary Charges, Conviction Transmittal or other initiating document, contains only allegations of professional misconduct. The attorney is presumed to be innocent of any misconduct warranting discipline until the charges have been proven.

Effective Date Case Number Description
3/7/2014 11-O-13513 Order Terminating Suspension [PDF]
1/15/2014 13-PM-13809 Decision [PDF] [WORD]
1/13/2014 11-O-13513 MPRE Suspension Order [PDF]
11/16/2012 11-O-13513 Decision [PDF] [WORD]
4/27/2012 11-O-13513 Order [PDF]
12/22/2011 11-O-13513 Order re Entry of Default [PDF]

California Bar Journal Discipline Summaries

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 attorney discipline records are available upon request.

November 16, 2012

MICHAEL HOWARD CROSBY [#125778], 61, of San Diego was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on one year of probation and he was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect Nov. 16, 2012.

Crosby stipulated to four counts of misconduct in a wrongful termination suit he filed for a client. The defendants offered a $5,000 settlement and said they would file bankruptcy if Crosby’s client rejected the offer. The client made a counter-demand of $95,000 and the defendant filed for bankruptcy, listing the client as a creditor. She believed Crosby represented her in the bankruptcy.

However, Crosby did not attend several meetings and conferences and the wrongful termination case was dismissed. He never informed the client or took any steps to reopen her case. Crosby did not respond to the client’s many attempts to reach him or to a bar investigator.

He admitted he failed to perform legal services competently, respond to client inquiries, inform a client of significant developments or cooperate with a bar investigation.

In mitigation, Crosby had no prior discipline in 24 years of practice, he performed community service and he belatedly cooperated with the bar’s investigation.

Start New Search »