Keith Hammond Bray was admitted to the California Bar 1st June 2002, but has since been disbarred. Keith graduated from Trinity Law School.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Keith Hammond Bray |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 1 June 2002 (21 years, 11 months ago) |
| Status | Disbarred |
| Bar Number | 219586 |
| Practice Areas | Bankruptcy Family Law Litigation Real Estate |
Contact
| Current Email | [email protected] |
|---|
Schools
| Law School | Trinity Law School (Santa Ana CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | University of Southern Calif (Los Angeles CA) |
Address
| Current Address | Law Office of Keith H. Bray, 2411 Carnegie Ln Unit A Redondo Beach, CA 90278 |
|---|---|
| Map |
History
| 11 October 2015 | Disbarred (8 years, 6 months ago) Disbarment 13-O-12487 |
|---|---|
| 1 July 2015 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (8 years, 10 months ago) Suspended, failed to pay fees |
| 10 April 2015 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (9 years ago) Ordered inactive 13-O-12487 |
| 3 April 2014 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 13-O-12487 (10 years, 1 month ago) |
| 24 April 2012 | Active (12 years ago) |
| 31 October 2011 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (12 years, 6 months ago) Suspended, failed to pass Prof.Resp.Exam 06-O-11728 |
| 21 May 2011 | Active (12 years, 11 months ago) |
| 22 December 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (13 years, 4 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 08-O-13061 |
| 24 August 2010 | Active (13 years, 8 months ago) |
| 25 July 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (13 years, 9 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 06-O-11728 |
| 1 June 2002 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (21 years, 11 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
October 11, 2015 KEITH HAMMOND BRAY [#219586], 46, of Redondo Beach, was disbarred Oct. 11, 2015 and ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court and make restitution. Bray’s misconduct involved one client matter. In 2012, a couple hired him to prevent their house from being foreclosed on and paid him $7,200 in advance for his services. Although the couple told him not to pursue a loan modification, something they had already tried more than once, Bray prepared a loan modification package he submitted to their lender. With an auction date for their home looming, Bray attempted to file a lawsuit against the lender. The summons and complaint were never accepted, though, since related court applications Bray filed were rejected. The couple was not aware of the applications and did not sign off on them. The signatures on the form were simulated. Before the matter was terminated, Bray filed an ex parte application to stall the auction date but did not serve the three defendants. When the matter was dismissed, he did not tell his clients and did not have their permission to proceed.The day the couple’s house was sold at a foreclosure sale, Bray misrepresented the status of the case saying he did not know why their matter was dismissed. The couple fired Bray and asked for a refund and the return of their file. What Bray provided them was incomplete and he did not provide an accounting. Bray provided a detailed statement of charges and activity to the State Bar during its investigation but it was inaccurate and deliberately created to mislead the investigator.He was ordered to pay $7,200 plus interest in restitution. In mitigation, he entered into a pretrial stipulation with the State Bar.Bray had two prior records of discipline, both 2010 suspensions. One was for failure to perform or respond to reasonable inquiries, improper withdrawal and misleading the court. The other was for failure to refund an unearned fee or maintain client funds in his client trust account, improper withdrawal, moral turpitude/misappropriation and violating a court order.December 22, 2010 KEITH HAMMOND BRAY [#219586], 41, of Redondo Beach was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on two years of probation with a 150-day actual suspension and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. The order took effect Dec. 22, 2010. Bray stipulated to five acts of misconduct in three matters.He didn’t refund some of the advance fee paid by the client in a child support matter. Although he wrote a check, it bounced and he never made good.In a divorce case in which he represented the husband, he persuaded the wife to enter into a loan agreement for $87,825. The loan proceeds were to pay for $23,000 in construction repairs and renovations to the couple’s home and for no other purpose.The bank purchased a cashier’s check for more than $37,143 payable to the husband and wife that the husband deposited in their joint checking account. He withdrew the funds without the wife’s consent and bought another cashier’s check payable to Bray, who knew the money was earmarked for construction. He did not maintain the money in a client trust account.Eventually, the client hired a new lawyer who asked for an accounting. Bray said the money had been spent on construction and attorney’s fees, but the wife did not know about the expenditures. Her lawyer demanded the $37,143. Bray refused. Two years later, the parties settled and the husband assigned his rights to the remaining amount — $292 — to the wife.Bray stipulated that he misappropriated his fees from the wife and that he failed to maintain client funds in trust.In the third matter, he represented the defendant in a lawsuit, but didn’t appear at a hearing or pay three court-ordered sanctions, and he failed to take steps to protect his client’s interests when he substituted out of the case. After failing to respond to discovery requests, he signed a substitution form but his client didn’t file it and Bray remained attorney of record. A second substitution form, signed by Bray and his client, also was not filed. The court entered the client’s default before a new law firm substituted in. The client paid one of the sanctions.Bray stipulated that he failed to obey a court order or take steps to avoid prejudice to his client.Bray also was disciplined July 25, 2010, with a stayed one-year suspension, a 30-day actual suspension, two years of probation and a requirement that he take the MPRE within one year.In that matter, he stipulated to misconduct in two cases. The first was a marital dissolution that he handled as an independent contractor for another lawyer. When the client filed for bankruptcy, the court stayed his matter as it related to property issues but did not stay questions of custody, visitation and attorney fees. Bray did not appear twice for trial and did not respond to his client’s messages. The court issued orders against his client regarding child support and attorney fees.Bray stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently, keep a client apprised of significant developments or respond to client inquiries and he improperly withdrew from a case.In a second dissolution matter, he signed his client’s name to three documents submitted to the court without informing the court the signatures were not actually written by his client.In mitigation, Bray had no prior discipline record and he demonstrated remorse. |
Languages
| Other Language Spoken by the Law Office Staff | Spanish |
|---|