Los Gatos, CA 95032
24 September 2010 | Disbarred (13 years, 7 months ago) Disbarment 09-N-15870 |
---|---|
25 April 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years ago) Ordered inactive 09-N-15870 |
8 January 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 3 months ago) Ordered inactive 09-N-15870 |
23 July 2009 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 9 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 07-O-12632 |
10 August 2008 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (15 years, 8 months ago) Ordered inactive 07-O-12632 |
3 June 2008 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 07-O-12632 (15 years, 11 months ago) |
5 February 2008 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (16 years, 2 months ago) Ordered Inactive/Fee Arb/B&P 6203 |
11 June 2007 | Inactive (16 years, 10 months ago) |
5 March 1993 | Active (31 years, 2 months ago) |
1 January 1991 | Inactive (33 years, 4 months ago) |
6 December 1990 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (33 years, 5 months ago) |
September 24, 2010 HOKYUNG KIM [#151373], 48, of Los Gatos was disbarred Sept. 24, 2010, and was ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. In a default proceeding, the State Bar Court found that Kim violated an earlier rule 9.20 requirement by failing to submit to the court an affidavit attesting that he notified his client, opposing counsel and other interested parties of his suspension.In the underlying discipline, also imposed as the result of Kim’s default, the bar court found that he committed three acts of misconduct: he failed to provide competent legal services, account for client funds or refund unearned fees.In recommending Kim’s disbarment, Judge Lucy Armendariz wrote that he “has demonstrated an unwillingness to comply with the professional obligations and duties imposed on California attorneys, although he has been given opportunities to do so.â€July 23, 2009 HOKYUNG KIM [#151373], 47, of Los Gatos was suspended for two years, stayed, and actually suspended for 90 days and until he makes restitution and the State Bar Court grants a motion to terminate the suspension. He also was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 9.20. If the actual suspension exceeds two years, he must prove his rehabilitation. The order took effect July 23, 2009. In a default proceeding, the bar court found that Kim committed three acts of misconduct: he failed to provide competent legal services, account for client funds or refund unearned fees.A client paid him $4,300 to handle a medical malpractice case. He made a demand for $500,000 from the hospital but never filed a lawsuit. The client eventually sued in pro per, but the case was dismissed.Almost one year after Kim assessed the date for the statute of limitations on the claim, he wrote to the client and declined to represent her. He had never given her a summary of time and legal expenses. |