Santa Ana, CA 92705
30 September 2001 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (23 years, 7 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 97-O-13617 |
---|---|
26 May 1995 | Discipline, probation; no actual susp. 94-C-12433 (29 years, 11 months ago) |
26 August 1994 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (30 years, 8 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 93-N-17732 |
10 August 1994 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (30 years, 9 months ago) Suspended, failed to pass Prof.Resp.Exam 91-O-06425 |
2 June 1994 | Conviction record transmitted to State Bar Court 94-C-12433 (30 years, 11 months ago) |
17 July 1993 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (31 years, 9 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 91-O-06425 |
25 June 1992 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (32 years, 10 months ago) Ordered inactive 91-O-06425 |
5 March 1992 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 91-O-06425 (33 years, 2 months ago) |
12 August 1991 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (33 years, 9 months ago) Suspended, failed to pay fees |
16 September 1982 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (42 years, 7 months ago) |
September 30, 2001 ROBERT LOUIS MARKS [#104026], 46, of Santa Ana was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on two years of probation with an actual one-year suspension and was ordered to prove his rehabilitation, take the MPRE and comply with rule 955. The order took effect Sept. 30, 2001. Marks stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently in a civil action he had filed in early 1991. In the summer of that year, he was suspended and closed his practice.He notified all his clients except one. He also failed to update his address with the State Bar, so mail sent to his old address was not received.Marks overlooked that one client’s file, did not contact opposing counsel and made no arrangements to withdraw from the case. He also did not receive any documents or pleadings in the matter since he had closed his office. Believing that he had taken steps to properly withdraw from the matter, he took no further action. Judgment was entered against his client.Marks was suffering from substance abuse problems, which affected his ability to supervise his secretary, led to a disorganized office and affected his ability to represent the one client he had.Marks also was disciplined in 1993, but failed to comply with his probation conditions by not attending ethics school.He was disciplined again in 1994 for not complying with rule 955 and in 1995 for a drunken driving conviction.In mitigation, Marks reports successful substance abuse rehabilitation and is now employed in another line of work. |