Opinion ID: 1247192
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Procedures for the Involuntary Transfer of an Active Member of the State Bar to Inactive Status

Text: Section 6007, subdivision (c)(3) directed the Board of Governors of the State Bar to formulate and adopt procedural rules to implement the statutory authorization for involuntarily enrolling attorneys meeting the criteria specified in the statute as inactive members of the State Bar. In rules 789 through 798, effective January 1, 1986, the board did so, and those rules thus help to define the parameters of the controversy before us. The rules first specify generally that such involuntary enrollment proceedings are to be public and they are to be expedited. (Rule 789.) This initial provision thus reflects the statutory goal of preventing harm attributable to the time required for disciplinary proceedings, and the concern with the pace of proceedings is apparent throughout the rules. The proceeding is commenced by the filing of an application for involuntary inactive enrollment by the Office of Trial Counsel with the Office of the Clerk of the State Bar Court. (Rule 791.) The application must be verified and must set forth with particularity the facts allegedly showing that the attorney's conduct meets the statutory criteria for involuntary inactive enrollment; i.e., that the attorney's conduct poses a substantial threat of harm to the attorney's clients or to the public. ( Ibid. ) The application must be promptly submitted to a single referee appointed by the Presiding Referee of the State Bar Court in accordance with rule 790 and a hearing date set for the matter. (Rule 791.) A copy of the application and all supporting documents must be served by certified mail upon the attorney at the last registered address reflected in the membership records of the State Bar. ( Ibid. ) Notice of the scheduled hearing date must be given at the same time. ( Ibid. ) The rules do not explicitly indicate what the hearing date should be, but as they direct the hearing to be held at the expiration of the [time for the attorney's response] (rule 793) and as the proceeding is to be expedited (rule 789), the necessary implication is that the matter be set for hearing on the first available date after expiration of the response time. [3] The hearing may be continued once for good cause, but not for more than 10 days. (Rule 795.) The attorney has 10 days from service of the application, extended in accordance with the provisions of section 6002.1, subdivision (c) for service by certified mail, in which to file a verified response. (Rule 792.) The right to a hearing is waived and none will be held if the attorney does not respond or include with the response a request that the hearing which has been set pursuant to rule 791 be held ( ibid. ), unless the Office of Trial Counsel makes a timely request for hearing (rule 793(b)) or the referee independently determines that a hearing should be held (rule 793(c)). The decision of the referee on the application is to be filed and served no later than five days after the hearing or, if no hearing is held, five days after the date set for hearing. (Rule 794.) If the referee determines that the application should be granted, notice of the order is provided to the attorney and to this court in accordance with section 6081 (rule 797), and the attorney has 60 days in which to petition for review of the order (§ 6083, subd. (b); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 952(c)). Absent from these provisions are any specific directives on the conduct of the proceedings. Rule 796 instead provides: In proceedings conducted under this chapter [15, commencing with rule 789 and concluding with rule 799 on petitions for retransfer to active status], rules 1-314, 351-414 and 501-534 of these rules shall apply as nearly as may be practicable. All other rules shall be inapplicable to proceedings conducted under this chapter. Among the rules thus incorporated are the provisions for the issuance of subpoenas (rules 310 through 314), but rendered inapplicable are the other provisions regarding discovery in formal disciplinary proceedings (rules 315 through 324). And, as suggested by the statutory dictate that the decision on the application be based on all the available evidence, including affidavits (§ 6007, subd. (c)), rule 556, which provides for the rules of evidence and hence the hearsay rule to be generally followed in formal proceedings, is among those not incorporated and thus inapplicable here. We will consider further the import of these rules in the course of addressing petitioner's contentions.