Tahoe Vista, CA 96148-0470
8 December 2010 | Discipline, probation; no actual susp. 10-O-01280 (13 years, 4 months ago) |
---|---|
5 December 2009 | Active (14 years, 4 months ago) |
5 November 2009 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 5 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 07-O-13147 |
18 June 2008 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 07-O-13147 (15 years, 10 months ago) |
19 June 1992 | Private reproval, public disclosure 91-C-05571 (31 years, 10 months ago) |
16 September 1991 | Conviction record transmitted to State Bar Court 91-C-05571 (32 years, 7 months ago) |
11 December 1989 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (34 years, 4 months ago) |
December 8, 2010 The probation of LISA MARIE FRAAS [#142040], 47, of Tahoe Vista was extended for two years on Dec. 8, 2010. Fraas was suspended and placed on probation in November 2009 after she stipulated to misconduct the previous June. She mistakenly believed that the one-month suspension lasted from October to November and stopped practicing during that time. However, she then resumed practice when she should have been suspended. When she realized her mistake, she notified the bar’s probation office.She stipulated that she practiced while suspended.The underlying discipline was imposed after Fraas stipulated to four counts of misconduct stemming from a dispute with her client over her fee. She also was privately reproved in 1992.In mitigation, Fraas acted in good faith, cooperated with the bar’s investigation, displayed remorse and no clients were harmed.November 5, 2009 LISA MARIE FRAAS [#142040], 47, of Tahoe Vista was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on one year of probation with a 30-day actual suspension and was ordered to take the MPRE within a year. The order took effect Nov. 5, 2009. Fraas stipulated to four counts of misconduct stemming from a dispute with her client over her fee. After the client fired her, she sent him a final invoice indicating that she owed him $1,555 in unearned fees. She later indicated the client had signed a fee agreement that called for a $2,500 non-refundable fee, and said the state Supreme Court has upheld such fees as legally binding and non-refundable. In fact, the court has not upheld non-refundable fees unless they are true retainers, which Fraas’ fee was not. Her fee agreement said she would be paid on an hourly basis, depending on the services provided. Those fees are considered refundable if not earned.A dispute between Fraas and her client ensued with the client demanding a refund and Fraas declining. She falsely told the client she had given up representing three other clients in order to take his case, and she threatened to reveal privileged information that could be used against the client both in his custody dispute and in his professional life.The client filed for fee arbitration and Fraas stipulated that she made several misstatements during a hearing. The arbitrator awarded the client $1,500, which Fraas paid.Fraas stipulated that she failed to refund unearned fees, properly maintain client funds in a trust account or preserve client secrets, and she committed acts of moral turpitude by making a series of misrepresentations.Fraas was privately reproved in 1992.In mitigation, the misconduct occurred when Fraas was separated from her husband and left with sole custody of the couple’s three young children. She was adjusting to the financial and emotional issues of the separation and subsequent divorce. |
Other Language Spoken by this Attorney | French |
---|