- GARRY LAWRENCE JONES
- THOMAS EDWARD KENT
- ANDREW PIERCE MULLALY
- ANTONIO MUNOZ
- PETER J. RIMEL
- LINDA Z. VOSS
- PATRICK J. GRANNAN
- BENJAMIN EMIL HERRON
- VINCENT VADIM SHULMAN
GARRY LAWRENCE JONES [#66344],
73, of Santa Ana, was disbarred Aug. 30, 2014 and ordered to comply with
rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court and make restitution.
Jones stipulated to multiple acts of misconduct in five matters,
including aiding in and engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, accepting
representation without obtaining the informed written consent of each client as
to a potential conflict, and failing to return unearned fees, deposit advance
filing fees in his client trust account, perform legal services with competence
or keep his clients reasonably informed of significant developments their
matter. Jones also failed to comply with the condition of his disciplinary
probation.
In 2011, Jones was suspended for 45 days and delegated supervision of his
law office to his associate attorney, his non-attorney senior paralegal and his
non-attorney office manager, but did not make the proper arrangements. As a
result, non-attorney staff continued to sign up clients in his name, use his
name on designation of attorney forms presented to clients and third parties
and send correspondence in his name to third parties. In one case, the firm
accepted representation of three clients who were injured in a multi-car
accident even though the interests of the clients potentially conflicted and
failed to obtain their informed written consent.
In another matter in 2011, Jones agreed to represent a couple and file a
lawsuit on their behalf against their lender for fraud and wrongful
foreclosure. The couple paid advanced fees totaling $8,000 but Jones took no
action on their behalf other than to prepare a form complaint, which was never
filed. Despite telling the couple that he planned to keep a portion of the fees
for the work that he did, Jones never returned any of the money and did not
provide them with an accounting.
During the time he was suspended, Jones also collected an advanced fee
from a couple he was representing in a foreclosure matter and did not perform
all of the services he agreed to or earn all of the $10,400 in advanced fees
they paid him. The couple fired him, but he failed to file a motion to withdraw
as their attorney of record and did not appear at subsequent hearings. As a
result, the lawsuit was dismissed, a development Jones never told the couple
about. He did not return any portion of the unearned fees and did not provide
them with an accounting.
In another matter in 2012, Jones failed to properly supervise his office
manager and another non-attorney, allowing them to submit an immigration
petition on a client’s behalf. He also allowed the office manager to collect
$1,218.50 for his work on the immigration petition.
He was ordered to pay $2,904 plus interest in restitution. In mitigation,
he entered into a pretrial stipulation with the State Bar.
Jones had three prior records of discipline. In 1994, he received a
private reproval with public disclosure for failing to perform competently on
behalf of a client or report the sanctions order within 30 days. He received a
public reproval in 2007 after stipulating to failing to perform on behalf of a
client by not attending multiple scheduled court hearings between November 2003
and September 2004. He also stipulated to failing to obey two court orders from
July 2004 and January 2005 requiring him to pay monetary sanctions arising from
his failures to perform for the client.
Jones’ third discipline was the 45-day suspension for failing to promptly
resolve a medical lien with a medical provider and collection agency after his
receipt of settlement funds on behalf of a client between January 2006 and
February 2009.
THOMAS EDWARD KENT [#107238],
57, of Los Angeles, was disbarred Aug. 30, 2014 and ordered to comply with
rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court and make restitution.
A State Bar Court hearing judge recommended Kent be
disbarred based on his discipline by the U. S. Bankruptcy Court of the Central
District for misconduct including the misappropriation of more than $270,000.
In 2012, Kent represented two debtors in a bankruptcy
action. In June of that year, he was ordered to deposit $270,357.51, the full
amount of the proceeds of a personal injury settlement involving his clients,
into his client trust account. Kent made the deposit but then began to make
withdrawals surreptitiously from the account for his own purposes. By March 29,
2013, the amount fell to $58.89.
In early 2013, he was ordered by the court to release
$125,000 of the funds to a homeowners association and wrote a check for that
amount knowing there were insufficient funds. At the time of his disbarment,
there was no evidence he had repaid any of the misappropriated money.
Kent was ordered to pay $250,000 plus interest in
restitution.
He had two prior records of discipline. In 1997, he was
suspended for failure to perform legal services
competently, return fees or account for client funds and for entering into a
prohibited business transaction.
In 2000, he was suspended again
for practicing law while he was suspended for the prior misconduct.
ANDREW PIERCE MULLALY [#185716],
45, of El Cajon, was disbarred Aug. 30, 2014 and ordered to comply with
rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.
Mullaly was disbarred after his default was entered for
failing to respond to allegations that he committed four counts of misconduct
in one client matter. Because he did not seek to have the default set aside, as
required under rule 5.85 of the State Bar’s Rules of Procedure, he was
disbarred and the charges against him were deemed admitted.
Mullaly failed to competently perform legal services by not
doing the work he was hired to do for more than two and a half years, committed
moral turpitude by misrepresenting to his client that he had filed a petition
for probate, engaged in the unauthorized practice of law and failed to
cooperate with a State Bar investigation.
ANTONIO MUNOZ [#169530],
58, of Rancho Cucamonga, was disbarred Aug. 30, 2014 and ordered to comply
with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court and make restitution.
Munoz stipulated to misconduct in 12 cases including committing an act
involving moral turpitude, disobeying a court order, commingling funds in his
client trust account and failing to cooperate with a State Bar investigation,
perform legal services with competence, refund unearned fees, communicate
promptly to the client all terms and conditions of an offer, take reasonable
steps to avoid reasonably foreseeable prejudice to a client, respond promptly
to reasonable status inquiries of a client, promptly return all papers and
property to a client upon termination, render appropriate accounts to a client
or report sanctions to the State Bar.
In one matter, between Oct. 9, 2012 and Nov. 5, 2012, he repeatedly
issued checks and withdrew from his client trust account when he knew that
there were insufficient funds and failed to provide a written response to the
allegations as requested by the State Bar. In another case, in 2012, he failed
to complete living trusts for a man and his uncle despite being paid $2,300.
In another of the matters, in 2013, he was paid $1,500 to help
incorporate a business but never took any action, did not respond to the
client’s inquiries, and never repaid the money.
He was ordered to pay $33,325 plus interest in restitution.
Munoz had one prior record of discipline, a 2013 suspension for commingling funds in his client trust account, writing
checks from his client trust account when there were insufficient funds to
cover them and failing to perform legal services with competence, return
unearned fees, respond to a client’s reasonable status inquiries or cooperate
and participate in a State Bar investigation. Munoz also misrepresented to a
client that he had filed a complaint in her case and had served the defendants
when he had not done so.
PETER J. RIMEL [#178345],
52, of Tustin, was disbarred Aug. 30, 2014 and ordered to comply with rule
9.20 of the California Rules of Court and make restitution.
Rimel stipulated to misconduct in one client matter:
committing an act of moral turpitude by misappropriating $233,500 in entrusted
funds, and failing to maintain client funds in his client trust account or to
render an account.
In November 2012, Rimel, acting as counsel to a trustee of
an estate, received three checks totaling $264,120.8 which were to be
distributed to five beneficiaries of the estate. Rimel deposited the money in
his client trust account and, after making the preliminary distributions and
expenditures, was supposed to hold $233,500 in trust.
Between November 2012 and April 2013, he intentionally
misappropriated the money. On April 23, 2013, the balance in the account had
dipped to $59.32. Rimel was ordered to pay $233,500 plus interest in restitution.
In mitigation, he entered into a pretrial stipulation with
the State Bar and had no prior record of discipline.
LINDA Z. VOSS [#111434],
62, of San Mateo, was disbarred Aug. 20, 2014 and ordered to comply with
rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.
Voss was disbarred following suspensions by the Northern District and the
Central District of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The Northern District court
suspended her after finding her culpable of failing to perform, presenting an
unwarranted claim, failing to obey laws or maintain respect due to a court,
misleading a judge, filing an action due to corrupt motive, violating a court
order and moral turpitude.
Among other things, Voss filed six incomplete bankruptcy petitions with
the court to thwart enforcement of a foreclosing bank’s unlawful detainer
judgment against two of her clients. After that, she failed to file the
required documents or to take any action to pursue the petitions. All six
petitions were dismissed.
In addition, she filed 83 cases in the Northern and Central districts
with the sole purpose of hindering and delaying foreclosing creditors.
Voss’ discipline by the Central District court resulted from her sharing
fees with a non-attorney who had previously helped a client with the client’s
loan modification case, then filing an incomplete Chapter 13 petition on the
client’s behalf, leading it to be dismissed. Voss also filed another 55
petitions in the Central District Court for the sole purpose of hindering and
delaying foreclosing creditors on behalf of her clients. The overwhelming
majority of those cases were filed in bad faith.
In mitigation, Voss entered into a pretrial stipulation with the State
Bar and had no prior record of discipline in 30 years of practicing law.
PATRICK J. GRANNAN [#115693],
55, of Whittier, was disbarred Aug. 21, 2014 and ordered to comply with
rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.
Grannan was disbarred after his default was entered for
failing to respond to charges that he disobeyed a court order by not complying
with rule 9.20. Because he did not seek to have the default set aside within
180 days, as required under rule 5.85 of the State Bar’s Rules of Procedure, he
was disbarred and the charges against him were deemed admitted.
Grannan had three prior records of discipline. In October
2004, he was suspended for failing to perform legal services with competence in
four client matters and failing to promptly return client papers and property.
In April 2011, he was again suspended for similar misconduct. He also committed
moral turpitude through concealment and misrepresentation and failed to keep a
client reasonably informed of significant developments, render appropriate
accounts, promptly refund unearned fees, or participate and cooperate in a
disciplinary investigation.
The third discipline, in July 2012, was for violating
specified terms of his probation.
BENJAMIN EMIL HERRON [#249172],
41, of Odessa, Texas, was disbarred Aug. 30, 2014 and ordered to comply
with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.
Herron failed to comply with the terms of a 2012 disciplinary order that
required him to submit to monthly urine laboratory testing and attend
Alcoholics Anonymous meetings.
Herron had two prior records of discipline. In December 2012, he was
suspended for failing to comply with the conditions of a 2010 public reproval.
The public reproval stemmed from his 2009 drunken driving conviction, which led
to an agreement in lieu of discipline. When he did not meet the conditions of
the agreement, he was publicly reproved.
VINCENT VADIM SHULMAN [#207105],
44, of Los Angeles, was summarily disbarred July 21, 2014 and ordered to
comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.
In April 2013, Shulman pleaded no contest to multiple felony
counts of grand theft, a conviction involving moral turpitude, meeting the
criteria for summary disbarment.
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.