Reza Bavar was admitted to the California Bar 19th February 2002, but has since been disbarred. Reza graduated from Loyola Law School.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Reza Bavar |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 19 February 2002 (23 years, 4 months ago) |
| Status | Disbarred |
| Bar Number | 218811 |
Schools
| Law School | Loyola Law School (Los Angeles CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | California St University Northridge (CA) |
Address
| Current Address | 8391 Beverly Blvd # 441 Los Angeles, CA 90048 |
|---|---|
| Map |
History
| 16 October 2014 | Disbarred (10 years, 8 months ago) Disbarment 12-O-15664 |
|---|---|
| 24 April 2014 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (11 years, 1 month ago) Ordered inactive 12-O-15664 |
| 24 May 2013 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 12-O-15664 (12 years ago) |
| 1 February 2013 | Inactive (12 years, 4 months ago) |
| 19 February 2002 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (23 years, 4 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
October 16, 2014 REZA BAVAR [#218811], 40, of Los Angeles, was disbarred Oct. 16, 2014 and ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. Bavar was found culpable of six acts of misconduct in a single client matter: committing moral turpitude, failing to maintain client funds in his trust account, failing to notify his client of receipt of funds, misappropriation, altering a copy of a settlement document and making misrepresentations.In 2009, the wife of one of Bavar’s friends hired Bavar to represent her in a motor vehicle warranty and lemon law claim involving a defective Aston Martin she had recently purchased. That October, he filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the Aston Martin and the dealership that sold her the car. In early September 2010, the defendants offered to settle the suit for $15,000. At the time of the settlement, Bavar was experiencing financial problems and didn’t want to get into a dispute with his client about the amount of fees he could take from the settlement funds. As a result, he told the client’s husband that the defendants had agreed to settle the case with the proviso that $6,500 would go to the client and the remaining $8,500 to him. Thinking there was no reason Bavar would deceive him, the man agreed to the deal on his wife’s behalf.Because the settlement agreement did not say anything about dividing the money and Bavar wanted to keep the money longer, he altered the settlement document before forwarding it to his client to say that the settlement wouldn’t be funded until a certain date. He then sent only the signed signature page to the defendants without disclosing that his client had signed a different document. When Bavar received the settlement check, he did not inform the client and forged her name on the back, depositing the money into his client trust account for his own use. When the date came that his client expected to receive her money, he began making excuses as to why he had not received the money. This continued until April 2012, more than 18 months after he received the settlement check. That month, Bavar sent an email to the client’s husband admitting to various acts of misconduct. The couple initially agreed to allow Bavar to pay them back, but when that didn’t happen on schedule the couple’s new attorney urged them to file a complaint with the State Bar.In mitigation, Bavar had no prior record of discipline, cooperated with the State Bar, showed remorse and repaid half of the money he owed his clients prior to a complaint being filed with the bar. He also presented evidence of his good character and evidence of his community service and pro bono work. |