Robert Earl Mitchell was admitted to the California Bar 4th August 1993, but has since been disbarred. Robert graduated from San Francisco Law School.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Robert Earl Mitchell |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 4 August 1993 (30 years, 9 months ago) |
| Status | Disbarred |
| Bar Number | 165631 |
Contact
| Current Email | [email protected] |
|---|---|
| Phone Number | 408-998-8080 |
| Fax Number | 408-971-9595 |
Schools
| Law School | San Francisco Law School (San Francisco CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | See Registration Card |
Address
| Current Address | 639 Tully Rd #A San Jose, CA 95111 |
|---|---|
| Map |
History
| 22 October 2000 | Disbarred (23 years, 6 months ago) Disbarment 98-O-00970 |
|---|---|
| 13 May 2000 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (23 years, 11 months ago) Ordered inactive 98-O-00970 |
| 16 March 2000 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (24 years, 1 month ago) Ordered inactive 98-O-00970 |
| 25 January 2000 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 98-O-00970 (24 years, 3 months ago) |
| 18 November 1999 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (24 years, 5 months ago) |
| 19 November 1998 | Active (25 years, 5 months ago) |
| 4 October 1998 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (25 years, 7 months ago) Suspended/Child & Fam Supp noncompliance |
| 4 August 1993 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (30 years, 9 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
October 22, 2000 ROBERT EARL MITCHELL [#165631], 47, of San Jose was disbarred Oct. 22, 2000, and was ordered to comply with rule 955 of the California Rules of Court. In a default proceeding, the State Bar Court found that Mitchell committed multiple acts of misconduct in six separate client matters. His actions included improperly withdrawing from representation, resulting in the dismissal of one client’s case, failing to refund $15,500 in unearned fees to three clients, and practicing law while suspended.In a criminal matter in which he represented the defendant, Mitchell did not attend his client’s sentencing hearing or a continued sentencing hearing, nor did he appeal the sentence despite his promise to do so.He prepared a complaint in a wrongful termination case, but never filed it, and did not return his client’s phone calls or refund an advance $4,000 fee.Although Mitchell did file a complaint in another wrongful termination case, he said the claim was for sexual harassment when in fact her claim was for age discrimination. He failed to appear for a case management conference, did not oppose a motion for summary judgment and was sanctioned by the court, but did not pay the sanction.He did not tell the client the motion for summary judgment was granted. When she arrived at his office for a scheduled appointment, she discovered he had moved. Mitchell did not return her phone calls or refund the unearned portion of her fee.Mitchell handled a racial discrimination case against a school district, filing a claim that was not timely. He subsequently filed a civil action, but failed to appear at two hearings. The case was dismissed and he did nothing to have it reinstated. He did not return phone calls or letters, moved without notifying his client, and failed to return his client’s file, refund an unearned fee or cooperate with the bar’s investigation.Mitchell’s misconduct was similar in a marital dissolution, which he filed but did not pursue. He did not reply to his client’s letters, give her file to a new attorney or cooperate with a bar investigation.Mitchell was suspended from practice in 1998 for failure to comply with child support obligations. He accepted a case, took $5,000 in advance fees, misrepresented his actions to his client, falsely told opposing counsel his client was not available for a deposition, and when he and his client were sanctioned, he did not inform the client.Mitchell never paid the sanction, did not appear at a related contempt hearing, did not refund his client’s fees and did not pay a small claims judgment his client obtained.The State Bar Court found that Mitchell failed to perform legal services six times, refund unearned fees fives times, return client files three times, communicate with clients five times or cooperate with the bar’s investigation five times. He also maintained an unjust action, collected an unconscionable fee and committed four acts of moral turpitude.Mitchell was suspended earlier last year for similar misconduct. Pointing out that Mitchell failed to perform legal services for 11 different clients, Judge Eugene E. Brott wrote, “It is clear that respondent has effectively abandoned his law practice and his clients. . . . There is no evidence that [he] recognizes his misconduct or appreciates the harm that has been caused to his clients or that he has been rehabilitated to any extent.†|