Stephen Ira Blanchfill was first admitted to the California Bar 4th January 1988, but is currently resigned with charges pending. Stephen graduated from Whittier Coll SOL.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Stephen Ira Blanchfill |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 4 January 1988 (37 years, 4 months ago) |
| Status | Resigned with Charges Pending |
| Bar Number | 132884 |
Contact
| Phone Number | (562) 484-9277 |
|---|
Schools
| Law School | Whittier Coll SOL (CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | California St University Long Beach (CA) |
Address
| Current Address | P O Box 2541 Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 |
|---|---|
| Map |
History
| 17 April 2005 | Resigned (20 years ago) |
|---|---|
| 29 December 2004 | Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA (20 years, 4 months ago) |
| 10 December 2004 | Active (20 years, 4 months ago) |
| 28 October 2004 | Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA (20 years, 6 months ago) |
| 14 September 2001 | Active (23 years, 7 months ago) |
| 1 July 2001 | Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA (23 years, 10 months ago) |
| 4 January 1988 | Admitted to The State Bar of California (37 years, 4 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
June 7, 2003 STEPHEN I. BLANCHFILL [#132884], 45, of Santa Fe Springs was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on two years of probation and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The probation shall be consecutive to a probation imposed in 2001. The order took effect June 7, 2003. Blanchfill stipulated that he repeatedly failed to perform legal services competently for a client who hired him to handle a variety of legal actions following the client’s dismissal from a grocery company. Although Blanchfill filed one petition, it failed to name the grocery company. He filed an amended petition three months later, but the statute of limitations had expired and the case was dismissed.Blanchfill also filed a federal lawsuit charging unlawful discharge and breach of duty against the grocery company, the client’s former union and another defendant. That case was dismissed against two defendants when it was seriously weakened by new information, and the cause of action against the third defendant was based solely on state grounds.Eventually, Blanchfill and his client stopped speaking to one another, relying on Blanchfill’s paralegal to relay messages. Blanchfill filed another complaint against the grocery company, but his check for filing fees bounced. He never provided a new check and the complaint was voided.The client fired Blanchfill and handled the case on his own.In mitigation, Blanchfill was part of a legal services plan that gave him 100-200 cases, overwhelming him. In addition, the clients paid reduced rates, so Blanchfill was unable to hire support staff. He was unable to properly oversee his cases. He now has a smaller, more manageable caseload.Blanchfill was disciplined in 2001 for misconduct in seven cases, resulting from the overwhelming number of cases he carried. |