Joe Alfred Leyva

Joe Alfred Leyva was admitted to the California Bar 8th December 1994, but has since been disbarred. Joe graduated from UCLA SOL.

Lawyer Information

Name	Joe Alfred Leyva
First Admitted	8 December 1994 (29 years, 5 months ago)
Status	Disbarred
Bar Number	175131

Contact

Current Email	[email protected]
Phone Number	626-242-4413
Fax Number	626-609-0412

Schools

Law School	UCLA SOL (Los Angeles CA)
Undergraduate School	University of California at Los Angeles (CA)

Address

Current Address	Law Ofc Joe A. Leyva, PO Box 254 Azusa, CA 91702-0254
Map

History

13 July 2007	Disbarred (16 years, 9 months ago) Disbarment 06-O-10874
17 February 2007	Not eligible to practice law in CA (17 years, 2 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 05-O-02581
2 February 2007	Not eligible to practice law in CA (17 years, 3 months ago) Ordered inactive 06-O-10874
20 October 2006	Not eligible to practice law in CA (17 years, 6 months ago) Ordered inactive 06-O-10874
18 September 2006	Not eligible to practice law in CA (17 years, 7 months ago) Suspended, failed to pay fees
29 June 2006	Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 06-O-10874 (17 years, 10 months ago)
21 May 2006	Not eligible to practice law in CA (17 years, 11 months ago) Ordered inactive 05-O-02581
10 February 2006	Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 05-O-02581 (18 years, 2 months ago)
8 December 1994	Admitted to the State Bar of California (29 years, 5 months ago)

Discipline Summaries

February 17, 2007

JOE ALFRED LEYVA [#175131], 38, of Azusa JOE ALFRED LEYVA [#175131], 38, of Azusa was suspended for one year, stayed, actually suspended for one year and until the State Bar Court grants a motion to terminate the suspension, and he 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 Leyva committed six acts of misconduct in a property foreclosure case. He represented a married couple who wanted to pursue an action against the Bank of America and other parties.

After demanding an accounting of the proceeds from the foreclosure sale from two parties, he was successful in obtaining excess funds for his clients. Several months later, he told the clients he had filed a complaint against the defendants, although he had not done so. A year later, he filed a breach of contract complaint but did not serve the defendants. When the client complained about a lack of progress, Leyva said he was attempting to schedule mediation or a settlement conference; in fact, he knew the defendants had not been served and he had made no contact with them.

The court scheduled an order to show cause hearing, but Leyva did not inform the defendants, who did not appear as a result. Leyva told the court the defendants had been served; as a result, the court discharged the order to show cause and set a case management conference. The judge also ordered Leyva to notify the defendants about the conference; he did not do so.

At the conference, the court continued the matter when Leyva appeared and said the breach of contract action might proceed by way of arbitration. Leyva continued to make misrepresentations to the court over ensuing months and eventually the breach of contract complaint was dismissed. He did not notify his clients and instead made another misrepresentation and gave them a phony document with a forged signature that purported to be a request for a hearing.

Several months later, Leyva sent the file to the client, with a substitution of attorney form.

The State Bar Court found that Leyva failed to perform legal services competently, obey court orders, communicate with clients or cooperate with the barâ€™s investigation, and he made misrepresentations and committed acts of moral turpitude.

In mitigation, Leyva practiced for eight years without a discipline record.

Joe Leyva