Anthony Emmanuel Pagkas was admitted to the California Bar 11th December 1996, but has since been disbarred. Anthony graduated from UC Davis SOL King Hall.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Anthony Emmanuel Pagkas |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 11 December 1996 (28 years, 4 months ago) |
| Status | Disbarred |
| Bar Number | 186112 |
Contact
| Current Email | [email protected] |
|---|---|
| Phone Number | 408-221-4159 |
| Fax Number | 408-374-9258 |
Schools
| Law School | UC Davis SOL King Hall (Davis CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | University of San Francisco (San Francisco CA) |
Address
| Current Address | 1484 Pollard Rd, No. 251 Los Gatos, CA 95032-1031 |
|---|---|
| Map | |
| Previous Address | Pagkas & D'Anjou, L.L.P. 777 N 1st St Ste 250 San Jose, CA 95112 |
History
| 16 August 2019 | Disbarred (5 years, 8 months ago) Disbarment 16-N-13168 |
|---|---|
| 25 February 2019 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (6 years, 2 months ago) Ordered inactive 17-C-03665 |
| 19 March 2018 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (7 years, 1 month ago) Ordered inactive 16-N-13168 |
| 24 July 2017 | Conviction record transmitted to State Bar Court 17-C-03665 (7 years, 9 months ago) |
| 17 October 2016 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 16-N-13168 (8 years, 6 months ago) |
| 19 May 2016 | Active (8 years, 11 months ago) |
| 19 February 2016 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (9 years, 2 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 14-O-01397 |
| 21 September 2012 | Active (12 years, 7 months ago) |
| 14 September 2012 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (12 years, 7 months ago) Suspended, failed to pass Prof.Resp.Exam 07-O-13322 |
| 13 June 2011 | Active (13 years, 10 months ago) |
| 14 May 2011 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (13 years, 11 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 07-O-13322 |
| 11 December 1996 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (28 years, 4 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
February 19, 2016 ANTHONY EMMANUEL PAGKAS [#186112], 49, of San Jose, was suspended from the practice of law for 90 days and ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. He was also placed on two years’ probation and faces a two-year suspension if he does not comply with the terms of his disciplinary probation. The order took effect Feb. 19, 2016. Between 2005 and 2012, Pagkas worked for the owners of a San Jose nightclub on various legal matters. There was no retainer agreement, and he informally billed them without invoices. In the spring of 2011, the relationship started to deteriorate. The owners asked Pagkas for information regarding ongoing legal issues, but Pagkas did not provide a substantive response. They eventually started questioning Pagkas about the fees they’d already paid and asked him for billing information and files. Pagkas never provided a response of any substance, did not provide an accounting of the fees paid, did not provide billing information and delayed in providing them with their files.In mitigation, he entered into a prefiling stipulation with the State Bar.He had one prior discipline, a 2011 suspension for improper pecuniary interest adverse to a client and failure to perform competently or report sanctions in excess of $1,000.May 14, 2011 ANTHONY EMMANUEL PAGKAS [#186112], 45, of San Jose was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on two years of probation with an actual 30-day suspension and he was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect May 14, 2011. Pagkas stipulated to three counts of misconduct during his representation of a defendant in a lawsuit. He did not respond to interrogatories, and although the client hired a new lawyer, the court entered a default judgment against the client of $730,466.The client sued Pagkas for malpractice and as that suit went forward, Pagkas bought the rights to the judgment from the plaintiff. He then tried to obtain from his former client consideration for the judgment that he now held. He originally asked for $100,000, hoping to get one-third of that. He also sought to intervene in the appeal and asked the court to be substituted in for the plaintiff to offset any future malpractice award.The court of appeal denied his request, found that Pagkas violated his fiduciary duty to his former client and sanctioned him $5,260, payable to the former client.Pagkas stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently or report the sanction to the State Bar and he obtained an interest adverse to his client.In mitigation, Pagkas cooperated with the bar’s investigation. |