Santa Rosa, CA 95404
10 December 2010 | Disbarred (14 years, 4 months ago) Disbarment 10-N-00039 |
---|---|
17 July 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 9 months ago) Ordered inactive 10-N-00039 |
5 April 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (15 years, 1 month ago) Ordered inactive 10-N-00039 |
13 November 2009 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (15 years, 5 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 07-O-12851 |
26 December 2008 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (16 years, 4 months ago) Ordered inactive 07-O-12851 |
3 December 1982 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (42 years, 5 months ago) |
December 10, 2010 CHERYL PARKINSON MARTINSEN [#104678], 54, of Santa Rosa was disbarred Dec. 10, 2010, and was ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. In a default proceeding, the State Bar Court found that Martinsen did not comply with a previous rule 9.20 requirement. She did not submit to the court an affidavit stating that she notified her clients, opposing counsel and other interested parties of her suspension from practice. Failure to do so is grounds for disbarment.Martinsen was suspended and placed on probation in 2009 after the bar court found in a default proceeding that she committed nine acts of misconduct in a single client matter: she failed to perform legal services competently; promptly respond to client inquires; keep a client informed of significant developments in a case; refund unearned fees; cooperate with the bar’s investigation or maintain a current address with the bar and she improperly withdrew from a case.November 14, 2009 CHERYL PARKINSON MARTINSEN [#104678], 53, of Santa Rosa was suspended for two years, stayed, with an actual 90-day suspension and until she makes restitution and the State Bar Court orders an end to the suspension, and she was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 9.20. If the actual suspension exceeds two years, she must prove her rehabilitation. The order took effect Nov. 14, 2009. In a default proceeding, the bar court found that Martinsen committed nine acts of misconduct in a single client matter: she failed to perform legal services competently; promptly respond to client inquires; keep a client informed of significant developments in a case; refund unearned fees; cooperate with the bar’s investigation or maintain a current address with the bar and she improperly withdrew from a case.Martinsen substituted in to a case after a previous lawyer died, telling the clients she was familiar with the case, had all the files and was prepared to continue the representation. Her clients were sanctioned after not responding to a motion to compel responses and were ordered to respond to discovery. Martinsen did not do so and the clients were again sanctioned. Meanwhile, the clients were unable to reach Martinsen, neither she nor they appeared at hearings; they were unaware of the sanctions against them and did not know about various motions including a summary judgment motion.Martinsen also substituted into a real estate matter for the same clients. However, she never filed a lawsuit and the clients, who believed they were owed more than $244,000 by the opposing party, were unable to reach her.In mitigation, Martinsen practiced for more than 23 years without a discipline record. |