State Bar Court of California

Hearing Department

STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

PROGRAM FOR RESPONDENTS WITH SUBSTANCE ABUSE OR MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES

Case Number(s): 06-O-13268-PEM,

In the Matter of: Richard A. Friedling, Bar # 155256, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).

Counsel For The State Bar: Cydney Batchelor, Deputy Trial Counsel

180 Howard St., 7th FI.

San Francisco, CA 94105

Tele: 415/538-2204

Bar # 114637,

Counsel for Respondent: Jonathan Arons,

101 Howard St., #310

San Francisco, CA 94105

Tele: 415/957-1818

Bar # 11257,

Submitted to: Program Judge – State Bar Court Clerk’s Office San Francisco

Filed: November 10, 2010

  <<not >> checked. PREVIOUS STIPULATION REJECTED

Note:  All information required by this form and any additional information which cannot be provided in the space provided, must be set forth in an attachment to this stipulation under specific headings, e.g., "Facts," "Dismissals," "Conclusions of Law," "Supporting Authority," etc.

A.    Parties' Acknowledgments:

1. Respondent is a member of the State Bar of California, admitted December 11, 1991.

2. The parties agree to be bound by the factual stipulations contained herein even if conclusions of law or disposition are rejected or changed by the Supreme Court. However, except as otherwise provided in rule 804.5(c) of the Rules of Procedure, if Respondent is not accepted into the Alternative Discipline Program, this stipulation will be rejected and will not be binding on the Respondent or the State Bar.

3. All investigations or proceedings listed by case number in the caption of this stipulation are entirely resolved by this stipulation and are deemed consolidated, except for Probation Revocation proceedings. Dismissed charge(s)/count(s) are listed under "Dismissals."  The stipulation consists of 6 pages, not including the order.

4. A statement of acts or omissions acknowledged by Respondent as cause or causes for discipline is included under "Facts."

5. Conclusions of law, drawn from and specifically referring to the facts are also included under "Conclusions of Law".

6. No more than 30 days prior to the filing of this stipulation, Respondent has been advised in writing of any pending investigation/proceeding not resolved by this stipulation, except for criminal investigations.

7. Payment of Disciplinary Costs-Respondent acknowledges the provisions of Bus. & Prof. Code §§6086.10 & 6140.7 and will pay timely any disciplinary costs imposed in this proceeding.

B.   Aggravating Circumstances [for definition, see Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct, standard 1.2(b)]. Facts supporting aggravating circumstances are required.

<<not>> checked. (1) Prior record of discipline [see standard 1.2(f)].

<<not>> checked. (a)    State Bar Court case # of prior case .

<<not>> checked. (b)    Date prior discipline effective

<<not>> checked. (c)    Rules of Professional Conduct/ State Bar Act violations:  

<<not>> checked. (d)    Degree of prior discipline

<<not>> checked. (e)    If Respondent has two or more incidents of prior discipline, use space provided below. .

<<not>> checked. (2) Dishonesty:  Respondent's misconduct was surrounded by or followed by bad faith, dishonesty, concealment, overreaching or other violations of the State Bar Act or Rules of Professional Conduct. 

<<not>> checked. (3) Trust Violation:  Trust funds or property were involved and Respondent refused or was unable to account to the client or person who was the object of the misconduct for improper conduct toward said funds or property.

<<not>> checked. (4) Harm:  Respondent's misconduct harmed significantly a client, the public or the administration of justice.

<<not>> checked. (5) Indifference:  Respondent demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his or her misconduct.

<<not>> checked. (6) Lack of Cooperation:  Respondent displayed a lack of candor and cooperation to victims of his/her misconduct or to the State Bar during disciplinary investigation or proceedings.

<<not>> checked. (7) Multiple/Pattern of Misconduct:  Respondent's current misconduct evidences multiple acts of wrongdoing or demonstrates a pattern of misconduct.

<<not>> checked. (8) No aggravating circumstances are involved. Additional aggravating circumstances:

C. Mitigating Circumstances [see standard 1.2(e)]. Facts supporting mitigating circumstances are required.

<<not>> checked. (1) No Prior Discipline:  Respondent has no prior record of discipline over many years of practice coupled with present misconduct which is not deemed serious.

<<not>> checked. (2) No Harm:  Respondent did not harm the client or person who was the object of the misconduct. 

checked. (3)            Candor/Cooperation:  Respondent displayed spontaneous candor and cooperation with the victims of his/her misconduct and to the State Bar during disciplinary investigation and proceedings. 

<<not>> checked. (4) Remorse:  Respondent promptly took objective steps spontaneously demonstrating remorse and recognition of the wrongdoing, which steps were designed to timely atone for any consequences of his/her misconduct. 

<<not>> checked. (5) Restitution:  Respondent paid $ on in restitution to without the threat or force of disciplinary, civil or criminal proceedings.

<<not>> checked. (6) Delay:  These disciplinary proceedings were excessively delayed.  The delay is not attributable to Respondent and the delay prejudiced him/her.

<<not>> checked. (7) Good Faith:  Respondent acted in good faith.

<<not>> checked. (8) Emotional/Physical Difficulties:  At the time of the stipulated act or acts of professional misconduct Respondent suffered extreme emotional difficulties or physical disabilities which expert testimony would establish was directly responsible for the misconduct.  The difficulties or disabilities were not the product of any illegal conduct by the member, such as illegal drug or substance abuse, and Respondent no longer suffers from such difficulties or disabilities.

<<not>> checked. (9) Severe Financial Stress:  At the time of the misconduct, Respondent suffered from severe financial stress which resulted from circumstances not reasonably foreseeable or which were beyond his/her control and which were directly responsible for the misconduct.

<<not>> checked. (10) Family Problems:  At the time of the misconduct, Respondent suffered extreme difficulties in his/her personal life which were other than emotional or physical in nature.

<<not>> checked. (11) Good Character:  Respondent's good character is attested to by a wide range of references in the legal and general communities who are aware of the full extent of his/her misconduct.

<<not>> checked. (12) Rehabilitation:  Considerable time has passed since the acts of professional misconduct occurred followed by convincing proof of subsequent rehabilitation.

<<not>> checked. (13) No mitigating circumstances are involved.

Additional mitigating circumstances: See Attached.

ATTACHMENT TO

STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION

IN THE MATTER OF: Richard A. Frienling, State Bar No. 155256

STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 06-O-13268-PEM

FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.

Respondent admits that the following facts are true and that he is culpable of violations of the State Bar Act and/or Rules of Professional Conduct.

Facts:

1. On March 4, 2004, respondent filed a motion on behalf of his then employer, who represented plaintiff Larry D. Butler in the matter entitled, Butler v. Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, et al., USDC for the Northern District of California Docket No. C 03-01098-WHA (the "Butler case"), to have his employer relieved as counsel of record in the Butler case, and Judge William Also up granted the motion. At that time, the Court signed the proposed order, and ordered respondent to do two things. First, respondent was ordered to send a copy of the order with a letter to Mr. Butler explaining that respondent’s then employer had been relieved as counsel, and that Mr. Butler was responsible for complying with the case management order on his own. Second, respondent was instructed to file the original order relieving his then employer as counsel of record so that it would be part of the official court file.

2. Respondent sent the order to Mr. Butler as instructed; however, he failed to file the original order relieving his then employer as counsel of record.

3. On April 21 and April 30, 2004, the Court issued orders which requested respondent and his then employer, among others, to provide a status report on the signed order. Respondent was not served with the April 21 order. He was served with the April 30 order at his then employer’s office, which was respondent’s official State Bar membership records address at the time. Respondent failed to comply.

4. On June 4, 2004, the Court issued an order that respondent appear on June 10, 2004, and show cause why he should not be required to pay attorneys’ fees and costs to defendant’s counsel for his failure to file the original order relieving his then employer as counsel of record. Respondent’s then employer was served with the order; however, respondent’s name was not on the proof of service. Although respondent’s official membership records address at the time was still at his then employer’s office, respondent maintains that he did not receive the order. He failed to comply.

5. On June 15, 2004, the Court issued a sanctions order against respondent, and thereby ordered him to pay $1000.00 within 30 days for his failure to appear at the OSC hearing and for his failure to comply with previous orders of the Court regarding the original order relieving his then employer as counsel of record, in favor of Dang and Trachuk and Strickland Haapala Altura Thompson & Abern LLP, as counsel for the defendants. The order was served on respondent at his then employer’s office, which was still his official membership records address. Respondent failed to comply in a timely manner, and not until after the intervention of the State Bar. He paid the sanctions in full in January 2007.

Conclusions of Law: By willfully failing to comply with Judge Alsup’s orders issued on April 30 and June 15, 2004 in a timely manner, respondent failed to obey orders of the court that required him to do acts connected with his profession, in violation of Business and Professional Code section 6103.

PENDING PROCEEDINGS.

The disclosure date referred to, on page one, paragraph A.(6), was April 19, 2007.

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES.

Candor and Cooperation: Respondent has been completely candid and cooperative with the State Bar during the resolution of this case.

ADDITIONAL MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES.

Additional Mitigating Circumstances:

No Prior Record of Discipline: Although the misconduct stipulated to herein is serious, it should be noted that Respondent has no prior record of discipline since being admitted to practice in 1991.

Delayed Restitution: Although he did not do so until after the intervention of the State Bar, respondent paid the sanctions in full in January 2007.

Participation in Lawyer’s Assistance Program: On December 2, 2004, respondent voluntarily contacted the State December 17, 2004, respondent voluntarily signed a pre-enrollment evaluation plan with LAP. Respondent was then assessed and monitored for a period of time by LAP. On April 11, 2005, Respondent signed a long-term participation plan with LAP. He has remained in full compliance with LAP ever since his first contact.

SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES

Case Number(s): 06-O-13268-PEM

In the Matter of:  Richard A. Frienling

By their signatures below, the parties and their counsel, as applicable, signify their agreement with each of the recitation and each of the terms and conditions of this Stipulation Re Facts, Conclusions of Law and Disposition.

Signed by:

Respondent: Richard A. Frienling

Date: April 19, 2007

Respondent’s Counsel: Jonathan Arons

Date: April 19, 2007

Deputy Trial Counsel: Cydney Batchelor

Date: April 23, 2007

ALTERNATIVE DISCIPLINE PROGRAM ORDER

Case Number(s): 06-O-13268-PEM

In the Matter of: Richard A. Friedling

Finding the stipulation to be fair to the parties and that it adequately protects the public, IT IS ORDERED that the requested dismissal of counts/charges, if any is GRANTED without prejudice, and:

checked. The stipulated facts and conclusions of law is APPROVED.

<<not>> checked. The stipulated facts and conclusions of law is APPROVED AS MODIFIED as set forth below.

<<not>> checked. All dates in the Hearing Department are vacated.

The parties are bound by the stipulation as approved unless: 1) a motion to withdraw or modify the stipulation, filed within 15 days after service of this order, is granted; or 2) this court modifies or further modifies the approved stipulation; or 3) Respondent is not accepted for participation in the Program or does not sign the Program Contract.the file date. (See rule 5.58(E) & (F) and 5.382(D), Rules of Procedure.)

Signed by:

Judge of the State Bar Court: Patricia McElroy

Date: August 10, 2007

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

[Rules Proc. of State Bar; Rule 5.27(B); Code Civ. Proc., § 1013a(4)]

I am a Case Administrator of the State Bar Court of California. I am over the age of eighteen and not a party to the within proceeding. Pursuant to standard court practice, in the City and

County of San Francisco, on  August 10, 2007, I deposited a true copy of the following document(s):

AMENDED CONFIDENTIAL STATEMENT OF ALTERNATIVE DISPOSITIONS AND ORDERS (Rule Proc. of State Bar, rule 803(a))

ADDENDUM TO STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

in a sealed envelope for collection and mailing on that date as follows:

checked. by first-class mail, with postage thereon fully prepaid, through the United States Postal Service at San Francisco, California, addressed as follows:

JONATHAN I ARONS

101 HOWARD ST #310

SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105

checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:

CYDNEY BATCHELOR, Enforcement, San Francisco

I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in San Francisco, California, on August 10, 2007.

Signed by:

George Hue

Case Administrator

State Bar Court