El Cerrito, CA 94530
9 January 2013 | Disbarred (12 years, 3 months ago) Disbarment 11-O-13946 |
---|---|
28 July 2012 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (12 years, 9 months ago) Ordered inactive 11-O-13946 |
18 June 2012 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (12 years, 10 months ago) Suspended, failed to pass Prof.Resp.Exam 09-O-19105 |
28 October 2011 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (13 years, 6 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 10-H-08580 |
12 September 2011 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (13 years, 7 months ago) Ordered inactive 11-O-13946 |
12 July 2011 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 11-O-13946 (13 years, 9 months ago) |
11 February 2011 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 2 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 09-O-19105 |
10 February 2011 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 2 months ago) Ordered inactive 10-H-08580 |
16 November 2010 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 10-H-08580 (14 years, 5 months ago) |
15 September 2009 | Public reproval with/duties 08-O-11520 (15 years, 7 months ago) |
12 July 2002 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (22 years, 9 months ago) |
January 9, 2013 JOHN HAYS GRIFFIN [#220368], 49, of El Cerrito was disbarred Jan. 9, 2013, and was ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. Griffin’s default was entered because he did not participate in disciplinary proceedings after being charged with failing to comply with conditions of a 2011 probation. When he made no move to have the default vacated within 180 days, he was disbarred under rule 5.85 of the bar’s Rules of Procedure.The underlying matter also was a default proceeding in which the bar court found that Griffin violated the terms of a 2009 public reproval by not scheduling a meeting with the probation office on time, submitting two quarterly probation reports late and not submitting a third, and by not attending ethics school or taking the MPRE. The reproval was imposed for misconduct in one client matter.Griffin also was suspended and placed on probation earlier in 2011 for failing to perform legal services competently, refund unearned fees, return client files, communicate with a client or comply with probation conditions, and he held himself out as an attorney when he was not entitled to practice.October 28, 2011 JOHN HAYS GRIFFIN, 48, of El Cerrito was suspended for two years, stayed, and was actually suspended for one year and until he provides proof of attendance at ethics school, takes the MPRE and the State Bar Court grants a motion to terminate the suspension. If the actual suspension exceeds two years, he must prove his rehabilitation. He also was ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. The order took effect Oct. 28, 2011. In a default proceeding, the bar court found that Griffin violated the terms of a 2009 public reproval by not scheduling a meeting with the probation office on time, submitting two quarterly probation reports late and not submitting a third, and by not attending ethics school or taking the MPRE.The reproval was imposed for failing to provide competent legal services, respond to client inquiries and return client files. He also was disciplined in February 2011 for similar misconduct, as well as holding himself out as an attorney when he was not entitled to practice.February 11, 2011 JOHN HAYS GRIFFIN [#220368], 48, of El Cerrito was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on four years of probation with an actual 60-day suspension and he was ordered to take the MPRE within a year. The order took effect Feb. 11, 2011. After filing a suit in a neighborhood dispute over a barking dog, Griffin failed to make three court appearances, and the case was dismissed. He was suspended during the course of the representation, and while suspended, he charged the client an additional $1,000.In a second matter, a couple hired Griffin to prepare their taxes, but he did not do so nor did he file for an extension, as he told the clients he would do. He didn’t return the clients’ phone calls or their file and did not provide a refund of their unearned fee. He also didn’t comply with conditions of a private reproval; his misconduct violated the Business & Professions Code and the Rules of Professional Conduct.Griffin stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently, refund unearned fees, return client files, communicate with a client or comply with probation conditions, and he held himself out as an attorney when he was not entitled to practice.In mitigation, he cooperated with the bar’s investigation and he had severe financial problems when his house went into foreclosure. |