1. JAMES FRIEND JORDAN
2. GREGORY JOHN KHOUGAZ
3. JEFFREY S. MINTZ
4. RICHARD JAMES SALAS
5. ANDREW HAN
6. KENNETH EUGENE KNOBLOCK
7. ERIC GWYNN LUNDBERG
8. DRAGO CAMPA
9. VICKI CARLTON TERRY
10. MICHAEL JOHANN SCHUNK

JAMES FRIEND JORDAN [#74606], 61, of Palm Desert was disbarred July 28, 2011, and was ordered to make restitution and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.

A State Bar Court review panel upheld a hearing judge’s recommendation that Jordan be disbarred, rejecting all his claims on appeal. It found that he misappropriated more than $200,000 of his client’s settlement funds and he failed to account for his client’s funds, maintain those funds in trust or release the file to a new lawyer.

The client, who had worked as a tractor driver and was retired, was nearly killed in an automobile accident and required extensive hospital treatment and convalescence for brain and head injuries. He settled his claim for damages for $739,043.72, an amount Jordan deposited in his client trust account. Jordan gave the client $238,507.81 as his share and was required to maintain $254,188 in the account for medical expenses after taking his fees. Instead, he gradually depleted the account, leaving only $9,041. His last withdrawal – of $5,000 – was made two days after the bar filed disciplinary charges against him.

The client’s doctors sued him for $274,304 they believed was available to settle his medical bills. Jordan filed a cross-complaint. The client eventually fired Jordan and hired a new lawyer, who had to seek a court order to substitute into the case. Despite repeated requests, Jordan did not send the file to the new lawyer or account for client funds. The medical providers agreed to accept $162,000 of any funds recovered from Jordan, but they ultimately received nothing.

Jordan was disciplined three times previously; two of the three matters included failures to properly pay out trust funds to or on behalf of clients. “We thus find a recurring and most troublesome theme of misconduct,” wrote the three-judge review panel. “Additionally, we are presented with the aggravating factors of harm to a seriously injured client of modest education coupled with Jordan’s clear indifference to rectification and lack of understanding of an attorney’s most basic ethical duties to a client.”

GREGORY JOHN KHOUGAZ [#107530], 55, of Los Angeles was disbarred July 28, 2011, and was ordered to make restitution and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.

Khougaz stipulated that he failed to comply with a rule 9.20 requirement that he submit an affidavit to the State Bar Court stating that he notified his clients, opposing counsel and other pertinent parties of his suspension from practice. He submitted an affidavit late, but it was rejected as untimely and defective. He later filed another affidavit in which he made false statements. The misrepresentations amounted to moral turpitude.

He also practiced law while suspended and falsely told the court he was entitled to practice, another act of moral turpitude.

And in a third matter, he handled a case and collected illegal fees while he was suspended. In addition, he made misrepresentations about his status, an act of moral turpitude, and failed to cooperate with the bar’s investigation.

Khougaz has a record of three prior disciplines. In mitigation, he suffered a serious ski injury that resulted in prolonged recuperation and multiple surgeries. However, he stipulated that despite the “distraction associated with this unfortunate and disabling injury . . . it does nothing to excuse the repeated indifference” Khougaz demonstrated toward his legal obligations. He was able to “fully engage in the unfettered practice of law,” according to the stipulation, and “the injury does nothing to exonerate or excuse his conscious activity of unauthorized practice of law and failure to cooperate in the State Bar’s investigation.”

JEFFREY S. MINTZ [#113467], 58, of Hemet was disbarred July 28, 2011, and ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.

In a default proceeding, the State Bar Court found that Mintz failed to comply with an earlier rule 9.20 requirement by not submitting to the court an affidavit stating that he notified his clients, opposing counsel and other interested parties of his suspension from practice.

The underlying discipline was imposed in 2009 for more than a dozen counts of misconduct in three client matters, including failures to perform services competently, communicate with clients, release a client file, return unearned fees and cooperate with the bar’s investigation. He also improperly withdrew from employment and didn’t comply with probation conditions.

Mintz also was disciplined in 2007 for misconduct in three matters. He stipulated that he failed to competently perform legal services, refund unearned fees, keep clients informed of significant developments, promptly return client papers and property, obey court orders and report judicial sanctions to the bar. 

RICHARD JAMES SALAS [#69930], 68, of Las Vegas was summarily disbarred Aug. 7, 2011, and was ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.

Salas pleaded no contest in 2010 to one count each of felony perjury and workers’ compensation insurance fraud. Because the crimes are felonies involving moral turpitude, they meet the criteria for summary disbarment.

He has been on interim suspension since July 9, 2010.

ANDREW HAN [#167073], 43, of Santa Fe Springs was summarily disbarred Aug. 7, 2011, and was ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.

Han pleaded guilty in 2006 to conspiracy to import methamphetamine and conspiracy to import ephedrine. According to the charging document, Han intended to manufacture and distribute methamphetamine knowing it would be imported to the United States. The Supreme Court has held that drug distribution involves moral turpitude. Because the crime is also a felony, it meets the criteria for summary disbarment.

Han has been on interim suspension since March 30, 2011.

KENNETH EUGENE KNOBLOCK [#157230], 56, of Escondido was disbarred Aug. 7, 2011, and was ordered to make restitution and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.

Knoblock stipulated in 2009 to misconduct involving misappropriation of entrusted funds. He then stipulated to disbarment in 2011, acknowledging that his misconduct warranted disbarment. He also has been disciplined twice previously.

He stipulated to 19 counts of misconduct in three matters. In the first, he misappropriated $23,187 from funds that he was required to hold in trust for his client. He also failed to properly maintain those funds, misused his trust account, practiced law while suspended and committed acts of moral turpitude.

In that matter, the conservator for her developmentally disabled daughter hired Knoblock to sue the daughter’s medical providers. The client paid $30,000 in advance costs as well as $12,500 in advance fees. Knoblock eventually settled the case for $95,000 in cash plus and a $120,571 annuity. The court approved payment of more than $60,000 in fees and costs to be deducted from the cash. Although the client also was entitled to some funds, Knoblock allowed the balance in his trust account to fall below the required amount.

He was suspended for failing to comply with MCLE requirements in 2003 but continued to handle the case and did not inform the client of his status.

In the second matter, a workers’ compensation claim, Knoblock filed a case but failed to perform any legal services. The case was dismissed when he failed to appear for hearings, but he didn’t notify his client and in fact misrepresented the status of the case. When the client learned the truth, he hired a lawyer to file a legal malpractice claim against Knoblock, who offered to submit the matter to binding arbitration if the client would not file a complaint with the State Bar. Knoblock also never told his client he was not entitled to practice.

He stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently, keep a client informed of developments in his case or respond to a client’s status inquiries and he committed acts of moral turpitude.

In the third matter, while not entitled to practice, Knoblock worked on an unlawful detainer action. He stipulated that he practiced law while not entitled, failed to keep a client informed about developments in his case or cooperate with the bar’s investigation and he committed acts of moral turpitude.

Knoblock also was disciplined in 1994 and 2004. In mitigation, he cooperated with the bar’s investigation by stipulating to disbarment.

ERIC GWYNN LUNDBERG [#116845], 63, of Clayton was disbarred Aug. 13, 2011, and was ordered to make restitution and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.

Lundberg pleaded guilty in 2009 to a felony violation of harboring an illegal alien for private financial gain. Between 1974 and 1984, while he was a police officer, Lundberg harbored an illegal Philippine immigrant who performed a variety of domestic duties at below-market rates. He had helped the victim enter the U.S. unlawfully.

In mitigation, Lundberg had no prior discipline record, he cooperated with law enforcement and the State Bar and he agreed to pay the victim $15,000 plus interest.

DRAGO CAMPA [#170057], 45, of Los Angeles was disbarred Aug. 13, 2011, and was ordered to make restitution and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.

In a default matter, the State Bar Court found that Campa committed 10 acts of misconduct in two matters.

He settled a personal injury claim but did not pay his client’s medical bill or respond to the client’s inquiries. The bar court found that Campa did not respond to client inquiries, pay out client funds or cooperate with the bar’s investigation and he committed acts of moral turpitude by misappropriating $5,720 that was owed to the medical provider.

In the second matter, he was hired to represent an individual who was charged in Hawaii with various narcotic-related offenses, including but not limited to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. Campa is not licensed to practice in Hawaii. The client paid him $80,000.

After telling the court at a detention hearing that he had filed an application to practice pro hac vice in the state, the court said it could find no record of his application and ordered him to file the application within four days. He filed late and the application was denied.

He made several misrepresentations to the court, practiced law in a jurisdiction where he was not admitted, submitted a false declaration to the court, did not release his client’s file when he was fired, didn’t account for the $80,000 fee and committed acts of moral turpitude.

Campa was privately reproved in 2006, and in 2010, he was suspended and placed on probation in a default proceeding in which the court found he committed 13 acts of misconduct.

Judge Donald F. Miles recommended Campa’s disbarment “based on the egregious nature of the present misconduct, (his) prior record of discipline and his failure to participate in the present proceedings.”

VICKI CARLTON TERRY [#118903], 53, of Roswell, N.M., was disbarred Aug. 13, 2011, and was ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.

Terry stipulated that she misappropriated $15,188.03 from her client in a Nevada divorce case. The funds were the proceeds from the sale of the client’s home; Terry placed the money in her client trust account.

The client submitted an application for reimbursement to the Nevada Client Security Fund, which approved payment of more than $25,000. Terry didn’t participate in the investigation because she didn’t know about it. The client ultimately received $15,442. Terry notified the California bar of the action in Nevada, where she was never charged with misconduct.

Although she resigned from the California bar in 2009, the Supreme Court declined a year later to accept her resignation. She stipulated to disbarment due to the misappropriation of client funds. Terry has repaid the Nevada bar $3,000.

She was disciplined in California in 2008 as a result of failing to pay sanctions in Nevada.

In mitigation, Terry cooperated with the bar’s investigation, was financially destitute as the result of a divorce, demonstrated her good character and displayed remorse. She has never practiced in California.

MICHAEL JOHANN SCHUNK [#212138], 40, of San Diego was disbarred Aug. 13, 2011, and was ordered to make restitution and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.

Schunk stipulated to eight acts of misconduct in three matters.

While representing the plaintiff in a civil case, Schunk didn’t appear at a case management conference and sent another lawyer to appear at a subsequent order to show cause hearing. The court ordered Schunk to appear or the case would be dismissed. Schunk filed a declaration stating he attempted to contact the court for a telephonic appearance but his calls were not answered. The case was dismissed when he failed to appear at another hearing.

Nonetheless, Schunk told the client the case was on track. When the client learned the truth, he was unable to reach Schunk to have the case reopened or to obtain his file. Schunk stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently, keep a client informed of developments in his case or return a client file, and he committed acts of moral turpitude by making misrepresentations to his client.

He also failed to perform legal services competently in an immigration case by not filing a petition to have the client’s removal cancelled. He also didn’t tell the client he would not file such a petition.

In the third matter, Schunk was hired to manage residential rental property held in a trust and to deposit all funds received in an interest-bearing trust account. He received a percentage of the rent as compensation but didn’t deposit it in a trust account, nor did he deposit funds he subsequently collected from some tenants. He also didn’t account for the funds.

The trustee obtained a judgment of nearly $24,000 against Schunk and although he agreed to repay $15,000 in monthly payments, he didn’t do so.

Schunk stipulated that he failed to deposit client funds in a trust account, account for client funds or pay out funds to his client.

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

 Caution!  More than 200,000 attorneys are eligible to practice law in California. Many attorneys share the same names. All discipline reports are taken from State Bar Court documents and should be read carefully for names, ages, addresses and bar numbers. Read the Discipline Key for an explanation of the different levels of disciplinary action. Use Attorney Search to check an attorney's official bar membership record.