Malik Ali Muhammad - #74824
Current Status: Disbarred
This member is prohibited from practicing law in California by order of the California Supreme Court.
See below for more details.
The following information is from the official records of The State Bar of California.
360 Grand Ave #109
Oakland, CA 94610
|Phone Number:||(510) 763-9097|
|Fax Number:||Not Available|
||Undergraduate School:||California St Univ Hayward; Hayward CA|
|Sections:||None||Law School:||UC Hastings COL; San Francisco CA|
|Effective Date||Status Change|
|12/19/1999||Not Eligible To Practice Law|
|7/24/1989||Not Eligible To Practice Law|
|7/25/1988||Not Eligible To Practice Law|
|8/31/1987||Not Eligible To Practice Law|
|7/6/1981||Not Eligible To Practice Law|
|7/21/1980||Not Eligible To Practice Law|
|6/28/1977||Admitted to The State Bar of California|
Actions Affecting Eligibility to Practice Law
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.
September 30, 2001
MALIK ALI MUHAMMAD [#74824], 56, of Oakland was disbarred Sept. 30, 2001, and was ordered to comply with rule 955.In a default proceed, the State Bar Court found that Muhammad committed multiple acts of misconduct in six client matters and one non-client matter. He failed to perform competently, refund unearned fees, communicate with clients or report sanctions, improperly withdrew from representation without protecting his clients’ interests, engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, charged illegal fees, violated court orders and committed acts of moral turpitude.He also has a record of six prior disciplines.In one matter, he promised twice to meet his client at the courthouse for hearings and then failed to show up. He then failed to return his client’s files for nine months and, despite a small claims judgment, has not refunded the client’s $600 advance fee.In another matter, Muhammad was retained to write a letter to his client’s employer with regard to a dispute between the two. Time was of the essence since the client wanted the letter sent prior to a scheduled arbitration two weeks later. Muhammad never sent the letter.The day before the arbitration, the client fired Muhammad and demanded a refund of his $300 advance fee. Despite two more letters, the fee was never refunded.After entering into a written contingency fee contract with another client who paid him $3,000 as an advance fee, Muhammad told the client six months later he would no longer represent her. He said he decided to convert the contract into an hourly rate arrangement and that he was keeping the fee to cover the hours he worked on her matter.The client obtained a small claims judgment of nearly $3,000, but Muhammad never paid it.Suspended from practice since 1999, Muhammad accepted a criminal case and made four court appearances on his client’s behalf. When he failed to appear at three subsequent hearings, he was sanctioned by the court and fired by his client, who unsuccessfully sought a refund. He also represented another client in a criminal matter while suspended.A personal injury action, in which Muhammad represented the plaintiffs, was dismissed at his request after he told the court his clients did not want to pursue the matter. In fact, the clients did not know about the request nor did he inform them of the dismissal.He then did not appear at three status conferences and was sanctioned each time for a total of $300. He did not refund a $2,400 advance fee.He failed to pay a court-ordered sanction of $4,781 in another case.In recommending Muhammad’s disbarment, State Bar Court Judge Eugene E. Brott cited the seriousness of his misconduct as well as an extensive record of prior discipline, his failure to participate in the proceedings and “his apparent willingness to repeatedly engage in the unauthorized practice of law....This court concludes that [his] disbarment from the practice of law is amply justified.”
December 19, 1999
MALIK ALI MUHAMMAD [#74824], 54, of Oakland was suspended for 30 days. The order took effect Dec. 19, 1999.Muhammad failed to comply with conditions attached to a public reproval and an agreement in lieu of discipline: he did not attend ethics school or take the professional responsibility exam.The discipline resulted from a contempt conviction.Muhammad, a devout Muslim and strong supporter of the black community, had intentionally failed to appear in court twice as a protest of the verdict in the Rodney King beating case. He served jail time for the conviction, which eventually led to discipline by the State Bar. The bar court found that he violated a court order and showed disrespect to a court.Muhammad intentionally failed to comply with the disciplinary orders as a protest against what he perceives as a racist system.