Mohammad Reza Nadim was admitted to the California Bar 23rd July 1987, but has since been disbarred. Mohammad graduated from Peoples COL.

Lawyer Information

NameMohammad Reza Nadim
First Admitted23 July 1987 (36 years, 9 months ago)
StatusDisbarred
Bar Number129366

Contact

Current Email[email protected]

Schools

Law SchoolPeoples COL (Los Angeles CA)
Undergraduate SchoolUniversity of California at Los Angeles (CA)

Address

Current AddressMohammad Nadim, PO Box 9303
Calabasas, CA 91372-9303
Map
Previous AddressMohammad Nadim
PO Box 2423
Van Nuys, CA 91404

History

26 April 2013Disbarred (11 years ago)
Disbarment 08-O-13001
5 December 2011Not eligible to practice law in CA (12 years, 4 months ago)
Ordered inactive 08-O-13001
7 April 2011Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 10-O-01087 (13 years ago)
27 May 2010Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 08-O-13001 (13 years, 11 months ago)
21 July 2008Active (15 years, 9 months ago)
1 July 2008Not eligible to practice law in CA (15 years, 10 months ago)
Admin Inactive/MCLE noncompliance
3 May 2003Discipline, probation; no actual susp. 00-O-12738 (20 years, 12 months ago)
23 July 1987Admitted to the State Bar of California (36 years, 9 months ago)

Discipline Summaries

April 26, 2013

MOHAMMAD R. NADIM [#129366], 65, of Van Nuys was disbarred April 26, 2013, and was ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court and to make restitution.

Nadim sought review of a State Bar Court hearing judge’s recommendation that he be disbarred. The hearing judge found Nadim culpable of 21 counts of misconduct including misappropriating more than $23,000 from two clients, engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, aiding another in the unauthorized practice of law and entering into a partnership with a non-lawyer. Nadim disputed his culpability and blamed his former cocaine abuse for much of his misconduct.

A three-judge panel of the State Bar Court upheld the disbarment recommendation, finding that: “Nadim’s testimony was contradicted by documentary evidence, which supports the hearing judge’s finding that Nadim lacked credibility.”

In one of the matters that led to his discipline, Nadim failed to show up for key hearings in a client’s civil matter which led to the case being dismissed, then refused for months to return her case file and filed a motion on her behalf despite having been fired. In another matter, Nadim entered into an agreement with a company called Debt Barter and its CEO, a non-lawyer, to provide loan modification services to clients, resulting in Debt Barter’s unauthorized practice of law. Nadim was also ordered to pay $38,044.41 in restitution, plus interest.

Nadim was previously disciplined in 2003 for misconduct in three cases including improperly withdrawing from a labor case. He received one year of suspension, stayed, and two years of probation.

May 3, 2003

MOHAMMAD REZA NADIM [#129366], 55, of Santa Monica was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on two years of probation and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect May 3, 2003.

He stipulated to misconduct in three cases.

He improperly withdrew from employment in a labor case. He filed a complaint against his client’s employer, but a discovery dispute ensued when opposing counsel said his discovery responses were insufficient.

Nadim advised his client to drop the case and when she declined, he asked her to sign a substitution of attorney. She did not want to do so without reviewing her file. After doing so, she still did not sign the substitution form. Nadim continued to advise her to hire a new lawyer and seek a continuance of her matter.

The client directly contacted the opposing counsel and unsuccessfully asked for a continuance. The opposing counsel wrote a letter to Nadim asking if he still represented the client, but he didn’t respond. He never was replaced as attorney of record.

He then failed to appear in court and later filed an untimely opposition to a motion by opposing counsel. He eventually was able to withdraw as counsel.

In a personal injury case, Nadim represented two clients with potentially adverse interests without obtaining their informed, written consent. He also failed to maintain complete records of all client funds, resulting in a negative balance in his trust account

In mitigation, he has no record of discipline and has performed extensive pro bono work.