Curtis Allen Westfall was admitted to the California Bar 17th June 1987, but has since been disbarred. Curtis graduated from University of San Diego SOL.

Lawyer Information

NameCurtis Allen Westfall
First Admitted17 June 1987 (38 years ago)
StatusDisbarred
Bar Number128447

Contact

Current Email[email protected]
Phone Number310-310-8122
Fax Number310-310-8176

Schools

Law SchoolUniversity of San Diego SOL (San Diego CA)
Undergraduate SchoolUniversity of Southern Calif (Los Angeles CA)

Address

Current AddressWestfall & Associates, 1431 Ocean Ave Ste 1200
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Map

History

16 October 2014Disbarred (10 years, 8 months ago)
Disbarment 12-O-16316
26 April 2014Not eligible to practice law in CA (11 years, 1 month ago)
Ordered inactive 12-O-16316
17 January 2014Not eligible to practice law in CA (11 years, 5 months ago)
Discipline w/actual suspension 11-O-16521
22 August 2013Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 12-O-16316 (11 years, 10 months ago)
15 July 2012Not eligible to practice law in CA (12 years, 11 months ago)
Ordered inactive 11-O-16521
16 April 2012Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 11-O-16521 (13 years, 2 months ago)
2 December 2011Discipline, probation; no actual susp. 07-O-14273 (13 years, 6 months ago)
17 June 1987Admitted to the State Bar of California (38 years ago)

Discipline Summaries

October 16, 2014

CURTIS ALLEN WESTFALL [#128447], 54, of Santa Monica, was disbarred Oct. 16, 2014 and ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court and make restitution.

The State Bar Court found Westfall culpable of entering into a business relationship with a client without the proper notifications, committing an act of moral turpitude, failing to communicate with a client and not complying with the conditions of his disciplinary probation.

In 2004, a man hired Westfall to represent him in arbitration proceedings. That November, Westfall’s client obtained an arbitration award of $323,450. The opposing side appealed the award to the superior court, which upheld it. By the time the opposing side appealed it again to the court of appeal, the client didn’t have money to pay Westfall’s fees. Westfall then introduced him to a company that loans money to plaintiffs who anticipate recovery from pending lawsuits or claims. The client agreed to do business with the company but Westfall did not advise him about the risks he faced if he failed to repay the company or his right to seek independent advice from a lawyer.

After the appellate court affirmed the award, Westfall took his fees and gave the rest to his client. He did not pay an advance to the company that loaned his client the money and did not inform the company that the arbitration award had become final as promised.

For months, the client asked Westfall if he had repaid the money but he did not respond. Eventually, the company initiated an arbitration claim against Westfall and his client to recover the advance. In July 2007, the company obtained an arbitration award against Westfall and his client for $63,913.41 plus interest. Westfall received the award but did not pay the advance or interest, leading the company to ask the superior court to confirm the arbitration award.

In September 2008, Westfall and his client entered into an agreement where Westfall would pay the client $1,000 a month. Westfall made only two payments before he stopped. In April 2009, the company put a levy on the client’s bank account, causing him serious financial hardship and nearly leading to a divorce.

As of the date of the court’s decision, Westfall had repaid the client $39,000 of the $59,874 that the company took from his bank accounts. Although Westfall paid other fees on the client’s behalf, he did not repay him the $20,874 still owed from the bank levy.

Westfall had three prior records of discipline. In 2004, he was privately reproved for failing to perform with competence in one client matter. In 2011, he was suspended for misconduct that included commingling and failing to perform legal services with competence, promptly release a client file, communicate or cooperate in a State Bar investigation. He was suspended again in 2014 after being found culpable of four counts of misconduct in one client matter: improper withdrawal from employment and failing to perform legal services with competence, inform a client of a significant development or cooperate in a State Bar investigation.

January 17, 2014

CURTIS ALLEN WESTFALL [#128447], 53, of Santa Monica was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on three years’ probation with an actual one-year suspension and until he makes restitution. He was also ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. The order took effect Jan. 17, 2014.

The State Bar Court found Westfall culpable of four counts of misconduct in one client matter: improper withdrawal from employment and failing to perform legal services with competence, inform a client of a significant development or cooperate in a State Bar investigation.

In 2007, Westfall was hired to represent a man and woman in their personal injury claim arising from a cruise ship accident. After filing a complaint in Los Angeles County Superior Court, Westfall failed to show up for the case management conference and then failed to appear at a hearing that followed. As a result, the superior court dismissed the matter due to lack of prosecution. Westfall did not inform his clients that their lawsuit had been dismissed and did not move to vacate the dismissal. He also failed to respond to letters from a State Bar investigator looking into a complaint filed over his handling of the case.

In mitigation, Westfall was dealing with family problems and struggling financially at the time of misconduct. He also received some mitigation for volunteer work, including serving as a mediator/settlement officer for Los Angeles County Superior Court.

Westfall had two prior records of discipline. In 2004, he received a private reproval after stipulating that he failed to perform legal services with competence. In 2011, he received a one-year stayed suspension for misconduct in one client matter and one State Bar investigation. His misconduct included commingling and failing to perform legal services with competence, promptly release a client file, communicate or cooperate in a State Bar investigation.