436 N June St
Los Angeles, CA 90004
26 September 2008 | Disbarred (16 years, 8 months ago) |
---|---|
16 September 2005 | Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA (19 years, 9 months ago) |
11 December 1989 | Admitted to The State Bar of California (35 years, 6 months ago) |
September 26, 2008 DAVID TURNER HARNEY [#142760], 54, of Los Angeles was disbarred Sept. 26, 2008, and was ordered to comply with rule 9.20. In a default proceeding, the State Bar Court found that Harney failed to comply with rule 9.20 as required by a 2007 disciplinary order. He did not submit to the State Bar Court an affidavit attesting that he notified his clients, opposing counsel and other pertinent parties of his suspension. Failure to comply with the rule is grounds for disbarment.In the underlying discipline, also a default, the bar court found in 2007 that Harney failed to perform legal services competently, disobeyed court orders and did not cooperate with the bar’s investigation. The statute of limitations expired in a medical malpractice case he was handling. The client won a malpractice verdict against Harney for $429,000 plus interest. He did not appear at two judgment debtor examinations.The same year, Harney was publicly reproved for failing to respond to a State Bar investigator’s inquiries.February 17, 2007 DAVID TURNER HARNEY [#142760], 53, of Los Angeles was suspended for one year, stayed, actually suspended for six months and until the State Bar Court grants a motion to terminate the suspension, and was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 955. If the actual suspension exceeds two years, he must prove his rehabilitation. The order took effect Feb. 17, 2007. In a default proceeding, the bar court found that Harney committed three acts of misconduct — he failed to perform legal services competently, obey court orders or cooperate with the bar’s investigation.A woman retained Harney’s firm to handle a medical malpractice case. Nine months after she signed a fee agreement and supplied her medical records, and despite numerous phone calls, nothing was done and the statute of limitations expired. The client won a malpractice judgment against the firm for $429,000 with interest.She hired a lawyer to collect the judgment, but Harney failed to appear at two judgment debtor examinations. Two bench warrants were issued over two months and Harney’s bail was set at $25,000. |