Case Number(s): 06-PM-14342-PEM
In the Matter of: Robert H. Stover, Bar # 202725, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Terrie Goldade, Bar # 155348
Counsel for Respondent: Bar #
Submitted to: assigned judge State Bar Court Clerk’s Office San Francisco
Filed: November 30, 2006
<<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.
1. Respondent is a member of the State Bar of California, admitted November 22, 1999.
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.
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. Dismissed charge(s)/count(s) are listed under "Dismissals." The stipulation consists of 11 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. The parties must include supporting authority for the recommended level of discipline under the heading "Supporting Authority."
7. 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.
8. Payment of Disciplinary Costs-Respondent acknowledges the provisions of Bus. & Prof. Code §§6086.10 & 6140.7. (Check one option only):
(a) checked. costs added to membership fee for calendar year following effective date of discipline (no actual suspension)
(b)<<not>> checked. until costs are paid in full, Respondent will remain actually suspended from the practice of law unless relief is obtained per rule 284, Rules of Procedure (actual suspension).
(c)<<not>> checked. costs are to be paid in equal amounts prior to February 1 for the following membership years: (hardship, special circumstances or other good cause per rule 284, Rules of Procedure
(d)<<not>> checked. costs waived in part as set forth in a separate attachment entitled "Partial Waiver of Costs".
(e)<<not>> checked. costs entirely waived.
In State Bar Court Case nos. 02-O-11065 and 03-O-04202, effective 1/28/04, R received a public reproval for violating Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 3-110 (A) and Business and Professions Code, sections 6068 (i), 6068 (l) and 6068 (m).
Additional aggravating circumstances:
Additional mitigating circumstances:
See Attachment.
IN THE MATTER OF: Robert H. Stover
CASE NUMBER: 06-PM-14342-PEM
FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
Respondent admits that the following facts are true and that he is culpable of violations of the specified statute.
1. On or about July 26, 2005, Respondent executed a Stipulation re: Facts, Conclusions of Law and Disposition with the State Bar in State Bar Court Case Nos. 05-O-00183 and 05-O-00185 ("Stipulation"). The Hearing Department of the State Bar Court filed an order approving the Stipulation on or about September 23, 2005.
2. On or about December 28, 2005, the California Supreme Court filed an Order in Case No. S138271 (State Bar Court Case Nos. 05-O-00183 and 05-0-00185) that Respondent be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year, that execution of suspension be stayed and that Respondent be placed on probation for a period of two years subject to the conditions of probation recommended by the Hearing Department of the State Bar Court in its order approving the Stipulation filed on September 23, 2005. Respondent was ordered to comply with the following terms and conditions of probation, among others:
A. As a condition of probation, Respondent was ordered to submit written quarterly reports to the Office of Probation on each January 10, April 10, July 10, and October 10 of his probation period and to state under penalty of perjury whether he had complied with the State Bar Act and the Rules of Professional Conduct. Respondent has not complied in that Respondent did not timely file his Quarterly Report due April 10, 2006; he filed that quarterly report on May 3, 2006.
B. As a condition of probation, Respondent was ordered to comply with the terms of the Lawyer Assistance Program ("LAP") participation plan signed by Respondent, as might be modified from time to time, and furnish satisfactory evidence of such compliance to the Office of Probation in each of his quarterly reports. Pursuant to the participation plan, Respondent was to call in for tests in a specified manner. Respondent has not complied in that he missed two tests because he did not call in, as agreed, on June 20 and 27, 2006.
3. By letter dated February 2, 2006, the Office of Probation reminded Respondent of the terms and conditions of his probation, including the conditions that he submit quarterly reports and comply with the Lawyer Assistance Program. Respondent received the Office of Probation’s letter. By failing to timely file his Quarterly Report due April 10, 2006, and by failing to comply with all of the conditions of Lawyer Assistance Program, Respondent wilfully violated Business and Professions Code, section 6068(k).
PENDING PROCEEDINGS.
The disclosure date referred to, on page one, paragraph A.(7), was October 16, 2006.
COSTS OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.
Respondent acknowledges that the Office of Probation has informed respondent that as of October 16, 2006, the estimated prosecution costs in this matter are approximately $1,546. Respondent acknowledges that this figure is an estimate only and that it does not include State Bar Court costs which will be included in any final cost assessment. Respondent further acknowledges that should this stipulation be rejected or should relief from the stipulation be granted, the costs in this matter may increase due to the cost of further proceedings.
AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.
The greatest amount of discipline would be warranted by probation violations which show a breach of a condition significantly related to the misconduct for which probation was given. In the Matter of Potack, (Rev. Dept. 19911 1 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 525, 537.
A wilful failure is demonstrated by a general purpose or willingness to permit the omission. See, e.g., Durbin v. State Bar (1979) 23 Cal.3d 461 ; Zitny v. State Bar (1966) 64 Cal. 2d 787.
ADDITIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES.
Respondent contends that he voluntarily began participation in the Lawyer Assistance Program ("LAP") in May of 2005 and that since that time he has submitted to random drug and alcohol testing. Respondent contests that since May 2005, he has never submitted a positive or dirty test. Respondent contends that when his LAP case manager contacted him about his missed tests, he acknowledged his failure to call-in, but was assured by his LAP case manager that it was "no big deal." Even so, Respondent contends that he initiated a more extensive call-in regimen to ensure that he no longer failed to call-in. Respondent now more fully understands that he must coordinate with both LAP and the Office of Probation regarding his conditions required by LAP and his conditions of probation imposed by the Supreme Court of California.
OTHER CONDITIONS NEGOTIATED BY THE PARTIES.
The parties stipulate to waive any variance in the language, allegations, and conclusions of law between this stipulation and the Notice of Motion and Motion to Revoke Probation filed on September 22, 2006. Respondent acknowledges that this stipulation contains language, allegations, and conclusion of law which differ from the language, allegations, and conclusions of law contained in the Notice of Motion and Motion to Revoke Probation filed on September 22, 2006. The parties further stipulate to waive the right to have an Amended Notice of Motion and Motion to Revoke Probation.
SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES
Case Number(s): 06-PM-14342
In the Matter of: Robert H. Stover
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: Robert H. Stover
Date: 10/23/06
Respondent’s Counsel:
Date:
Supervising Attorney, Office of Probation: Terrie Goldade
Date: 11/15/06
Case Number(s): 06-PM-14342
In the Matter of: Robert H. Stover
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 disposition are APPROVED and the DISCIPLINE RECOMMENDED to the Supreme Court.
<<not>> checked. The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED AS MODIFIED as set forth below, and the DISCIPLINE IS RECOMMENDED to the Supreme Court.
<<not>> checked. All Hearing dates 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. (See rule 135(b), Rules of Procedure.) The effective date of this disposition is the effective date of the Supreme Court order herein, normally 30 days after the file date. (See rule 953 (a), California Rules of Court.)
Signed by:
Judge of the State Bar Court: Pat McElroy
Date: November 28, 2006
I, the undersigned, over the age of eighteen (18) years, whose business address and place of employment is the State Bar of California, 1149 South Hill Street, Los Angeles, California 90015, declare that I am not a party to the within action; that I am readily familiar with the State Bar of California’s practice for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service; that in the ordinary course of the State Bar of California’s practice, correspondence collected and processed by the State Bar of California would be deposited with the United States Postal Service that same day; that I am aware that on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date on the envelope or package is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing contained in the affidavit; and that in accordance with the practice of the State Bar of California for collection and processing of mail, I deposited or placed for collection and mailing in the City and County of Los Angeles, on the date shown below, a true copy of the within
STIPULATION RE: FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING PROBATION VIOLATION-"PM" PROCEEDING
in a sealed envelope placed for collection and mailing as first class mail, at Los Angeles, on the date shown below, addressed to:
ROBERT H. STOVER
P.O. BOX 1614
HANFORD, CA 93232-1614
in an inter-office mail facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed to:
N/A
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Los Angeles, California, on the date shown below.
DATED: November 15, 2006
SIGNED BY: Cindy Jollotta
Declarant
[Rule 62(b), Rules Proc.; 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 November 30, 2006, I deposited a true copy of the following document(s):
STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING
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:
ROBERT H. STOVER
P O BOX 1614
HANFORD, CA 93232 - 1614
checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:
TERRIE GOLDADE, Probation, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in San Francisco, California, on November 30, 2006.
Signed by:
Bernadette C.O. Molina
Case Administrator
State Bar Court