Opinion ID: 1167668
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The Hartman Matter

Text: In August 1983, Phillip Hartman retained petitioner to represent him in a civil matter involving a landslide onto property owned by Hartman in Santa Monica. Hartman paid petitioner $200 as an advance on costs. About a week after he had been paid, petitioner told Hartman that an action had been filed on his behalf. In fact, petitioner never filed any complaint in the matter. About a year later, Hartman called petitioner's office several times leaving messages for petitioner to call back. The calls went unanswered. Eventually, Hartman retained another attorney to represent him in the matter. The new attorney wrote several letters to petitioner requesting that he forward Hartman's file and return the $200 advanced for costs. Petitioner eventually forwarded a copy of Hartman's file, consisting of a draft of a complaint. He never returned any portion of the fee. The State Bar Court found that petitioner abandoned Hartman and wilfully failed to perform the services for which he had been retained, wilfully made a false representation that he had filed a complaint knowing that the matter had not been filed, and wilfully failed to return the $200 advanced for costs. By his conduct, the State Bar Court concluded that petitioner wilfully violated rules 2-111(A)(3), 6-101(A)(2) and 8-101(B)(4), [12] former rule 6-101(2) and sections 6068, 6103 and 6106.