Sheldon Feigel

January 8, 2015

SHELDON WAYNE FEIGEL [#160455], 51, of Sanger, was disbarred Jan. 8, 2015 and ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court and to make restitution. The State Bar Court found Feigel culpable of nine counts of misconduct in two client matters including: acts of moral turpitude including misrepresentation, fabrication of a court order and misappropriation; and failing to deposit client funds in a trust account, perform legal services with competence or release a client file upon request. Feigel’s misconduct resulted from his representation of a facility that trains and boards thoroughbred race horses. In early 2009, the facility hired Feigel to help collect money two customers owed them. Specifically, Feigel was tasked with filing lawsuits on the facility’s behalf and obtaining and enforcing judgments against the two clients. At no time did he file a lawsuit against either client. But in October 2010, he submitted an invoice to the client listing $910 in advanced costs for fees related to the lawsuits. Rather than deposit the money into his client trust account, he put it into a general business account, using the money for his own purposes. In an effort to resolve one of the client’s debts and obtain duplicate title to one of his horses, Feigel fabricated a court order to transfer livestock. Feigel then wrote to one customer who owed his client money stating that he had obtained an order transferring title of his horses to other individuals, which he knew was untrue. Based on Feigel’s misrepresentations and the fabricated order, the registration for both of the man’s horses was changed. Feigel also told his client there had been a hearing regarding one of the supposed lawsuits when there had not. In September 2012, the client requested a copy of the files for both matters. Feigel was fired the following month but did not promptly return the files. In mitigation, Feigel had no prior record of discipline and cooperated with the State Bar. He also received some mitigation for emotional difficulties he was experiencing at the time of his misconduct and for evidence of his good character.