Opinion ID: 1292667
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Dishonesty, Deceit, and Fraud.

Text: Also egregious were the multiple acts of dishonesty and deceit over an extended period of time. Petitioner lied about his identity in order to obtain clients from other attorneys and deceived the clients by misrepresenting his association with the attorney. Petitioner falsely advised the opposing party from whom he had received a settlement check that the check had been lost when, in fact, petitioner had actually cashed the check; petitioner misrepresented to his clients that he was properly performing services when, in fact, he had failed to perform such services. Such dishonest conduct is inimical to both the high ethical standards of honesty and integrity required of members of the legal profession and to promoting confidence in the trustworthiness of members of the profession. ( Levin v. State Bar (1988) 47 Cal.3d 1140, 1147 [255 Cal. Rptr. 422, 767 P.2d 689]; In re Bloom (1987) 44 Cal.3d 128, 135-136 [241 Cal. Rptr. 726, 745 P.2d 61]; see Kent v. State Bar, supra, 43 Cal.3d at p. 732; Toll v. State Bar (1974) 12 Cal.3d 824, 831, fn. 7 [117 Cal. Rptr. 427, 528 P.2d 35]; standard 2.3 of the Standards.) Petitioner's acts of misconduct were recent, took place over an extended period of time, and affected numerous clients and nonclients. In light of the extremely serious nature of his misconduct, and in the absence of the most compelling mitigating circumstances, disbarment is appropriate.