Current Status:  Active

This member is active and may practice law in California.

See below for more details.

Profile Information

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

Bar Number:	186112
Address:	Law Ofc Anthony E Pagkas 777 N 1st St Ste 250 San Jose, CA 95112 Map it	Phone Number:	(408) 291-5401
		Fax Number:	(408) 291-5302
		e-mail:	efis@pliuwot.comsdgjyqts@adhamti.govnoiit@hsawk.govgjpcjqce@qdtt.orgqyycg@gyigphe.netdbbiykdyu@yjqfm.orginyjdr@amkotp.eduotpsmoq@ald.netffhpql@sedkjml.eduregnyu@iithrl.netmpiltndhq@ogmrhum.compagkas@yahoo.compaaggtcmb@trp.comebae@ghkensyf.orgjnwgdntk@plkeabyr.netntqym@lqqhhqt.edugehlqhug@hgybrc.comqehqy@kub.edulpjptrw@imsqalwk.comiinsji@ctcsa.gov
County:	Santa Clara	Undergraduate School:	Univ of San Francisco; San Francisco CA
District:	District 6
Sections:	None	Law School:	UC Davis SOL King Hall; Davis CA

Status History

Effective Date	Status Change
Present	Active
9/21/2012	Active
9/14/2012	Not Eligible To Practice Law
6/13/2011	Active
5/14/2011	Not Eligible To Practice Law
12/11/1996	Admitted to The State Bar of California

Explanation of member status

Actions Affecting Eligibility to Practice Law

Effective Date	Description	Case Number	Resulting Status
Disciplinary and Related Actions Overview of the attorney discipline system.
9/14/2012	Suspended, failed to pass Prof.Resp.Exam	07-O-13322	Not Eligible To Practice Law
5/14/2011	Discipline w/actual suspension	07-O-13322	Not Eligible To Practice Law
12/2/2010	Stipulated disposition filed in SBCt	07-O-13322
Administrative Actions
This member has no public record of administrative 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
9/21/2012	07-O-13322	Order Terminating Suspension [PDF]
9/14/2012	07-O-13322	MPRE Suspension Order [PDF]
8/13/2012	07-O-13322	MPRE Suspension Order [PDF]
8/9/2012	07-O-13322	Order Temp Stay [PDF]
5/14/2011	07-O-13322	Stipulation [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.

May 14, 2011

ANTHONY EMMANUEL PAGKAS [#186112], 45, of San Jose was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on two years of probation with an actual 30-day suspension and he was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect May 14, 2011.

Pagkas stipulated to three counts of misconduct during his representation of a defendant in a lawsuit. He did not respond to interrogatories, and although the client hired a new lawyer, the court entered a default judgment against the client of $730,466.

The client sued Pagkas for malpractice and as that suit went forward, Pagkas bought the rights to the judgment from the plaintiff. He then tried to obtain from his former client consideration for the judgment that he now held. He originally asked for $100,000, hoping to get one-third of that. He also sought to intervene in the appeal and asked the court to be substituted in for the plaintiff to offset any future malpractice award.

The court of appeal denied his request, found that Pagkas violated his fiduciary duty to his former client and sanctioned him $5,260, payable to the former client.

Pagkas stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently or report the sanction to the State Bar and he obtained an interest adverse to his client.

In mitigation, Pagkas cooperated with the bar’s investigation.