Opinion ID: 1154088
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: hearing panel and review department's findings and recommendations

Text: The hearing panel found that petitioner (1) violated his oath and duties as an attorney (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6103), and his acts involved moral turpitude ( id., § 6106); (2) attempted to charge an unconscionable fee (Rules Prof. Conduct, rule 2-107); (3) failed to maintain a complete record of his client's funds and render accountings to them; and (4) failed promptly to refund any part of monies paid in advance and not expended on the client's behalf or earned as attorney fees. It unanimously recommended that petitioner be placed on six months' actual suspension to run concurrently with his prior suspension. Petitioner sought review of the hearing panel's determination. After making one additional finding of fact, namely, that the totality of petitioner's conduct showed an attempt to defraud the S's, the review department, with one member dissenting, recommended disbarment. The review department expressly stated that its bases for increasing petitioner's discipline were (1) petitioner's conduct was more serious than that found by the hearing panel, (2) petitioner lacked candor before both the hearing panel and review department, [3] (3) petitioner failed to acknowledge his wrongdoing and showed no remorse, and (4) petitioner had been previously disciplined by us for acts of serious professional misconduct.