Home > Public >  Attorney Search > Attorney Profile

Attorney Search

 

Paul F. Fegen - #31680

Current Status:  Disbarred

This member is prohibited from practicing law in California by order of the California Supreme Court.

See below for more details.

Profile Information

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

Bar Number: 31680    
Address: 9025 Wilshire Blvd Ste 500
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
Phone Number: (310) 286-1111
Fax Number: (310) 286-7285
e-mail: Not Available 
County: Los Angeles
Undergraduate School: Univ of California at Los Angeles; CA
District: District 2    
Sections: None Law School: USC Law School; Los Angeles CA

Status History

Effective Date Status Change
Present Disbarred
9/24/2011 Disbarred  
10/6/2008 Not Eligible To Practice Law  
10/21/2006 Active  
9/21/2006 Not Eligible To Practice Law  
2/1/2006 Active  
11/12/2005 Not Eligible To Practice Law  
6/6/1961 Admitted to The State Bar of California

Explanation of member status

Actions Affecting Eligibility to Practice Law

Effective DateDescriptionCase NumberResulting Status

Disciplinary and Related Actions

Overview of the attorney discipline system.

9/24/2011 Disbarment 06-O-15034 Disbarred 
5/7/2011 Ordered inactive 06-O-15034 Not Eligible To Practice Law 
6/3/2009 Discipline w/actual suspension 08-PM-12588 Not Eligible To Practice Law 
3/24/2009 Vol.inactive(tender of resign.w/charges) 09-Q-11358 Not Eligible To Practice Law 
10/6/2008 Ordered inactive 08-PM-12588 Not Eligible To Practice Law 
9/21/2006 Discipline w/actual suspension 05-O-01082 Not Eligible To Practice Law 
11/12/2005 Discipline w/actual suspension 04-O-11253 Not Eligible To Practice Law 

Administrative Actions

This member has no public record of administrative actions.


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
9/24/2011 06-O-15034 Stipulation [PDF] [HTML]
6/3/2009 08-PM-12588 Decision [PDF] [WORD]
9/21/2006 05-O-01082 Stipulation [PDF] [HTML]
11/13/2005 04-O-11253 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.

June 3, 2009

PAUL F. FEGEN [#31680], 75, of Beverly Hills Probation was revoked, the previous stay of suspension was lifted and he was suspended for six months and until he makes restitution. If the suspension exceeds two years, he must prove his rehabilitation. He also was ordered to comply with rule 9.20. He receives credit for a period of inactive enrollment that began Oct. 6, 2008. The order took effect June 3, 2009.

Fegen failed to submit three quarterly reports on time, complete six hours of MCLE courses or make restitution to a former client.

In the underlying matter, Fegen stipulated in 2006 that he failed to perform legal services competently, keep a client informed of significant developments, or take steps to avoid prejudice to his client and he held himself out as practicing or entitled to practice law when suspended.

In 2005, he was suspended and placed on probation after stipulating that he failed to perform legal services competently, keep a client informed of significant developments or take steps to protect his client’s interests when he was terminated. He also committed acts of moral turpitude.

Fegen argued that his noncompliance with probation resulted from confusion about its terms.

September 21, 2006

PAUL F. FEGEN [#31680], 72, of Los Angeles was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on three years of probation with an actual 30-day suspension and was ordered to prove his rehabilitation. The order took effect Sept. 21, 2006.

Over a seven-year period, Fegen’s client checked periodically to determine the status of her personal injury case. Fegen claims he never received any messages from her.

When she received two collection notices, she sent them to Fegen. He performed no legal services for her, failing to make any claim on her behalf, file a complaint or take any action with respect to the collection notices. He also improperly withdrew from representation and failed to keep his client reasonably informed of significant developments in her case.

In a second matter, Fegen held himself out as entitled to practice while he was suspended. He allowed a friend to use his name as counsel for her in a case, but was unaware she had done so after he was suspended.

He had been disciplined in 2005 for failing to perform legal services competently or communicate with a client and improper withdrawal from employment and committing acts of moral turpitude.

November 12, 2005

PAUL F. FEGEN [#31680], 71, of Los Angeles was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on three years of probation with an actual 60-day suspension and was ordered to prove his rehabilitation and take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect Nov. 12, 2005.

Fegen stipulated to four counts of misconduct in a personal injury case in which he represented the plaintiff. He filed a lawsuit but did not respond to form interrogatories or the demand for production. He did not comply with a court order, was sanctioned $473 and the case ultimately was dismissed. He did not inform his client for 20 months, telling his client in the interim that he was working on her case or that there was nothing new.

He failed to perform legal services competently or keep a client informed about developments in her case, he improperly withdrew from representation and he committed acts of moral turpitude.

In mitigation, he has no prior discipline record and says he never personally told the client that he was working on the case. He acknowledged that he was responsible for his staff’s actions.


Start New Search »