Armando Rodriguez Venegas is an active member of the California Bar and was admitted 1st December 1981. Armando graduated from Humphrey's Coll SOL.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Armando Rodriguez Venegas |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 1 December 1981 (43 years, 6 months ago) |
| Status | Active |
| Bar Number | 100422 |
Contact
| Current Email | arvattorney@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Previous Email | armandovenegas@yahoo.com |
| Phone Number | 408-318-1126 |
Schools
| Law School | Humphrey's Coll SOL (Stockton CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | San Jose State University (San Jose CA) |
Address
| Current Address | venegas law office, 3532 Slopeview Dr San Jose, CA 95148-2841 |
|---|---|
| Map | |
| Previous Address | 783 Morada Ct Manteca, CA 95336 |
| Previous Address | venegas law office, 783 Morada Ct Manteca, CA 95336-3327 |
History
| 9 February 2012 | Active (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|---|---|
| 25 May 2011 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years ago) Suspended, failed to pass Prof.Resp.Exam 06-O-15274 |
| 5 March 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (15 years, 3 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 06-O-15274 |
| 27 June 2007 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 06-O-15274 (17 years, 11 months ago) |
| 1 December 1981 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (43 years, 6 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
March 5, 2010 ARMANDO RODRIGUEZ VENEGAS [#100422], 65, of San Jose was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on probation for two years with an actual suspension of six months and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. The order took effect March 5, 2010. In a review decision, the State Bar Court found that Venegas committed misconduct by failing to release a client file on request and by misleading the State Bar. Venegas represented a client who does not speak or read English in an injury case. The client was awarded $86,580; Venegas gave the client a check for $50,000 and kept the rest as his fees. The client later hired another attorney because he questioned whether he was owed another $12,500. The new lawyer sought the files but Venegas told the State Bar he did not turn them over because he was waiting for a substitution of attorney document. The court found that Venegas should have released the files in any case and that his reason for failing to turn them over was not credible.Venegas has two prior discipline records related to issuing checks from his client trust account and failing to maintain adequate records or timely submit probation reports. |