Roger Daniel Price was admitted to the California Bar 3rd December 1982, but has since been disbarred. Roger graduated from University of San Diego SOL.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Roger Daniel Price |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 3 December 1982 (42 years, 6 months ago) |
| Status | Disbarred |
| Bar Number | 106203 |
Contact
| Phone Number | 559-732-8009 |
|---|---|
| Fax Number | 559-732-8000 |
Schools
| Law School | University of San Diego SOL (San Diego CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | Occidental Coll (Los Angeles CA) |
Address
| Current Address | 204 N Floral #B Visalia, CA 92391 |
|---|---|
| Map |
History
| 28 September 2006 | Disbarred (18 years, 8 months ago) Disbarment 05-N-03834 |
|---|---|
| 10 April 2006 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (19 years, 2 months ago) Ordered inactive 05-N-03834 |
| 19 December 2005 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (19 years, 6 months ago) Ordered inactive 05-N-03834 |
| 28 October 2005 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 05-N-03834 (19 years, 7 months ago) |
| 7 October 2005 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (19 years, 8 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 03-O-01049 |
| 14 May 2005 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (20 years, 1 month ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 04-O-10024 |
| 27 September 2004 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (20 years, 8 months ago) Ordered inactive 03-O-01049 |
| 16 August 2004 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (20 years, 10 months ago) Ordered inactive 04-O-10024 |
| 7 June 2004 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 04-O-10024 (21 years ago) |
| 28 October 2003 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 03-O-01049 (21 years, 7 months ago) |
| 3 December 1982 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (42 years, 6 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
September 28, 2006 ROGER DANIEL PRICE [#106203], 56, of Visalia was disbarred Sept. 28, 2006, and was ordered to comply with rule 955. The State Bar Court found that Price violated a 2005 disciplinary order that required him to comply with rule 955. He did not submit to the Supreme Court an affidavit stating that he notified his clients, opposing counsel and other pertinent parties of his suspension.In the underlying discipline, the court found that Price committed six counts of misconduct, five in a single matter. He failed to obey court orders by not complying with a discovery order, did not communicate with a client, perform legal services with competence or return the client’s file and he improperly withdrew from representation. He also did not cooperate with the bar’s investigation.Later the same year, he was disciplined again for three counts of misconduct related to serving as trustee of a testamentary trust. He did not comply with Probate Code requirements that he account to the trust’s beneficiaries, he failed to obey court orders by not paying $1,200 in sanctions and he did not inform the bar about a civil judgment against him.Price’s default was entered in the disbarment proceedings.October 7, 2005 ROGER DANIEL PRICE [#106203], 55, of Visalia was suspended for one year, stayed, actually suspended for 120 days and until the State Bar Court grants a motion to terminate the suspension, and was ordered to comply with rule 955. If the actual suspension exceeds two years, he must prove his rehabilitation. The order took effect Oct. 7, 2005. In a default matter, the State Bar Court found that Price committed three acts of misconduct — failure to obey a court order, report to the State Bar a civil judgment for breach of fiduciary duty or support California law as a trustee of a testamentary trust.Price neglected his obligations as trustee of a testamentary trust — he did not provide tax information to the beneficiaries over several years, and one beneficiary had to hire counsel to represent her. The beneficiaries sued to remove Price as trustee, but he did not appear at a hearing and was removed. He did not comply with the court’s order to provide a full accounting.The day of a contempt hearing, he submitted a declaration acknowledging he had possession of more than $888,000 in trust assets and provided some tax returns. He did not provide returns for four years, nor did he produce complete financial records.One beneficiary hired a CPA firm that determined that $161,893 could not be accounted for. The beneficiaries sued Price and won a judgment of more than $200,000. Price did not report the judgment to the bar within 30 days, as required.The State Bar hired an independent expert who was able to account for more than $191,000 that was in question. The expert believed the funds were distributed appropriately.Price was disciplined in 2004 for client abandonment and failure to comply with a court order.May 14, 2005 ROGER DANIEL PRICE [#106203], 54, of Visalia was suspended for one year, stayed, actually suspended for 90 days and until he pays sanctions and the State Bar Court grants a motion to terminate the suspension, and he was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 955. If the actual suspension exceeds two years, he must prove his rehabilitation. The order took effect May 14, 2005. Price was hired to handle a divorce, but did not notify the client about demands that she execute documents regarding the sale of her house or that she respond to discovery. At a hearing, Price promised his client’s quick response to the demands, but did nothing, so the court ordered his client to pay sanctions of $500. Still Price did not notify the client.Price did not attend a later hearing at which his client was sanctioned another $537.The client learned a settlement conference was scheduled in her case and stopped by Price’s office. He told her he had resigned and would no longer represent her. Although the client demanded the return of her documents, Price never provided them. At the settlement conference, the client learned for the first time that she was in default due to Price’s failure to respond to discovery requests and his failure to attend a hearing.In a default hearing, the bar court found that Price failed to perform legal services competently, communicate with his client, return client papers or cooperate with the bar’s investigation and he violated a court order and improperly withdrew from representation. |