Mark Douglas Estes was admitted to the California Bar 12th December 1983, but has since been disbarred. Mark graduated from University of San Diego SOL.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Mark Douglas Estes |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 12 December 1983 (41 years, 6 months ago) |
| Status | Disbarred |
| Bar Number | 110518 |
Contact
| Current Email | [email protected] |
|---|---|
| Phone Number | 858-581-2151 |
| Fax Number | 858-581-2151 |
Schools
| Law School | University of San Diego SOL (San Diego CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | University of Illinois (IL) |
Address
| Current Address | 1925 Chalcedony St San Diego, CA 92109-3407 |
|---|---|
| Map |
History
| 16 October 2015 | Disbarred (9 years, 8 months ago) Disbarment 14-N-03272 |
|---|---|
| 6 April 2015 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (10 years, 2 months ago) Ordered inactive 14-N-03272 |
| 24 August 2014 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (10 years, 10 months ago) Ordered inactive 14-N-03272 |
| 30 June 2014 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 14-N-03272 (10 years, 11 months ago) |
| 26 March 2014 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (11 years, 2 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 12-O-14108 |
| 8 April 2013 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 12-O-14108 (12 years, 2 months ago) |
| 12 December 1983 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (41 years, 6 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
October 16, 2015 MARK DOUGLAS ESTES [#110518], 59, of San Diego, was disbarred Oct. 16, 2015 and ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. Estes was disbarred after his default was entered after he did not respond to a notice of disciplinary charges that he failed to comply with rule 9.20. Because he did not seek to have the default set aside or vacated within 90 days as required under rule 5.85 of the State Bar’s Rules of Procedure, he was disbarred and the charges against him deemed admitted.Estes was previously suspended in 2014 for four counts of misconduct stemming from a single client matter: entering into an improper business transaction with a client, misrepresentation, issuing checks against insufficient funds and failing to cooperate in a State Bar investigation.March 25, 2014 MARK DOUGLAS ESTES [#110518], 58, of San Diego was suspended for two years, stayed, and placed on three years’ probation with an actual one-year suspension and until he makes restitution. He was also ordered to take the MPRE and comply with Rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. The order took effect March 25, 2014. The State Bar Court found Estes culpable of four counts of misconduct stemming from a single client matter. The misconduct included entering into an improper business transaction with a client, misrepresentation, issuing checks against insufficient funds and failing to cooperate in a State Bar investigation.Estes’ misconduct involved a client who had been an accountant and attorney for many years. Because the client trusted Estes, he agreed to provide him with a $50,000 loan but wanted some security on the loan. Estes provided him with a note secured by his personal residence in San Diego County, but unbeknownst to the client there were already two liens on record against the property. Prior to accepting the loan, Estes did not advise the client that he could seek the advice of an independent lawyer. Although Estes paid interest on the loan, he did not pay it off within one year as agreed.Estes asked for and received a one-year extension on the loan secured against the same San Diego County property, but he did not record the second deed. He continued to pay interest on the loan but did not pay off the principal and asked for another one-year extension. The client asked for new paperwork but Estes told him it was not needed. Estes paid him some money but stopped making payments on the loan in January 2010. Also, in 2009 he stopped making payments on his San Diego County property.The client ultimately filed a lawsuit which resulted in a $50,833.32 judgment against Estes for breach of contract and breach of duty. Estes never paid it and on Aug. 27, 2012, the judgment was amended to $87,771.06. In 2012, he filed a bankruptcy petition and listed the client’s judgment as a debt to be dismissed. His bankruptcy petition, however, was later withdrawn.In mitigation, Estes had no prior record of discipline. He received limited mitigation for entering into an extensive stipulation with the State Bar. |