San Marcos, CA 92078-4031
2 July 2019 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (5 years, 10 months ago) Admin Inactive/MCLE noncompliance |
---|---|
3 July 2018 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (6 years, 10 months ago) Suspended, failed to pay fees |
14 February 2012 | Active (13 years, 2 months ago) |
13 August 2011 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (13 years, 8 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 07-O-13641 |
16 December 2010 | Active (14 years, 4 months ago) |
21 August 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 8 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 05-C-01366 |
25 July 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 9 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 08-O-11075 |
27 July 2005 | Conviction record transmitted to State Bar Court 05-C-01366 (19 years, 9 months ago) |
15 June 2005 | Conviction record transmitted to State Bar Court 05-C-02589 (19 years, 10 months ago) |
17 September 2004 | Active (20 years, 7 months ago) |
21 July 2004 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (20 years, 9 months ago) Suspended, failed to pass Prof.Resp.Exam 00-O-12620 |
22 June 2003 | Discipline, probation; no actual susp. 00-O-12620 (21 years, 10 months ago) |
25 June 2002 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 00-O-12620 (22 years, 10 months ago) |
7 June 2002 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 00-O-14252 (22 years, 11 months ago) |
18 January 2002 | Active (23 years, 3 months ago) |
1 September 2001 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (23 years, 8 months ago) Admin Inactive/MCLE noncompliance |
31 July 1995 | Active (29 years, 9 months ago) |
10 August 1988 | Active (36 years, 9 months ago) |
25 July 1988 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (36 years, 9 months ago) Suspended, failed to pay fees |
3 December 1984 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (40 years, 5 months ago) |
August 13, 2011 GLENN WILLIAM CHAROS [#115506], 55, of Escondido was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on two years of probation with a six-month actual suspension and until he makes restitution and he was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. If the actual suspension exceeds two years, he must prove his rehabilitation. The order took effect Aug. 13, 2011. Charos stipulated that he practiced law while suspended for failing to take and pass the MPRE, part of a 2003 disciplinary order. He handled a bodily injury claim and received a settlement check for $17,752. Although he gave his client $6,600, he did not account for the remaining funds and stipulated that he failed to account for client funds.Charos has been disciplined three times previously. In the underlying discipline, he stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently, communicate with clients or cooperate with the bar’s investigation and he improperly withdrew from representation without taking steps to protect his client’s interests. He was disciplined twice in 2010, once for probation violations of the 2003 order and the second time for two DUIs with priors. In mitigation, he cooperated with the bar’s investigation, demonstrated remorse and was prepared to call witnesses to testify to his good character.July 25, 2010 GLENN WILLIAM CHAROS [#115506] 54, of Escondido was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on two years of probation with an actual 90-day suspension and he 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 July 25, 2010. Charos also was disciplined Aug. 21, 2010, with another two-year stayed suspension, three years of probation with a 90-day actual suspension and additional requirements that he take the MPRE and comply with rule 9.20. The second suspension came after Charos stipulated that he was twice convicted of driving under the influence with priors. Neither conviction involved moral turpitude, but they did involve other misconduct warranting discipline. Charos also has been convicted twice of driving without a license.The July discipline was imposed for probation violations stemming from a 2003 discipline; in that matter, Charos submitted 10 quarterly probation reports late, and completed ethics school and continuing education classes late. The 2003 discipline was imposed for misconduct in three matters, including failures to perform legal services competently or cooperate with the bar’s investigation and he improperly withdrew from representation.In mitigation, Charos presented evidence of pro bono and charitable activities.June 22, 2003 GLENN W. CHAROS [#115506], 47, of Escondido was suspended for 15 months, stayed, placed on three years of probation and was ordered to take the MPRE. The order took effect June 22, 2003. Charos stipulated to misconduct in three matters.Charos represented a client in several legal matters, including a divorce, child custody and property damage issues. The client also had another attorney, but neither the client nor the other attorney could reach Charos.In the second case, a property dispute which Charos settled for $2,500, the other party signed a promissory note for that amount. He paid Charos’ client $1,800 and defaulted on the balance, so the client asked Charos to pursue collection.When he did nothing, the client complained to the San Diego County Bar Association; Charos then agreed to do the necessary work to recover the money still owed his client. He did not communicate further with the client.In a personal injury matter, Charos filed a complaint, but nearly two years later, the court ordered him to show cause why he had failed to file any documents necessary to bring the matter to trial. Charos did not appear at two hearings and the case was dismissed.Charos did not promptly move to vacate the dismissal. By 2001, when the client inquired about the case, his letter was returned as undeliverable.Charos stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently, communicate with clients or cooperate with the bar’s investigation and he improperly withdrew from representation without taking steps to protect his client’s interests.In mitigation, he has taken remedial steps to reform his office procedures, his clients were not harmed, he pursued the divorce case until his client’s wife disappeared, and he completed the property dispute case. The client insisted on recovering the money he was owed eight years after the case ended. |