Diamond Bar, CA 91765
13 May 2011 | Disbarred (13 years, 11 months ago) Disbarment 10-N-07135 |
---|---|
10 December 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 4 months ago) Ordered inactive 10-N-07135 |
24 May 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 11 months ago) Suspended, failed to pass Prof.Resp.Exam 08-O-12542 |
12 May 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 11 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 09-PM-18782 |
23 January 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (15 years, 3 months ago) Ordered inactive 09-PM-18782 |
3 May 2009 | Active (16 years ago) |
3 April 2009 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (16 years, 1 month ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 08-O-12542 |
3 December 2002 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (22 years, 5 months ago) |
May 13, 2011 STEVE SEHAENG KWON [#222338], 47, of Diamond Bar was disbarred May 13, 2011, and was ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. Kwon stipulated that he violated an earlier rule 9.20 order by failing to submit to the court an affidavit stating that he notified his clients, opposing counsel and other interested parties of his suspension. He filed a declaration of compliance about five weeks late. He also did not meet with the probation department by the required deadline.He was disciplined in 2009 for failing to perform legal services competently and committing acts of moral turpitude, and again in 2010 for failing to comply with probation conditions.In mitigation, he cooperated with the bar’s investigation and demonstrated remorse.April 3, 2009 STEVE SEHAENG KWON [#222338], 45, of Los Angeles was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on two years of probation with an actual 30-day suspension and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect April 3, 2009. Kwon stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently and committed acts of moral turpitude while handling visas for a client and his family. He was hired to obtain an extension of the client’s treaty investor visa status; the visa was to expire at the end of 2006. He also was to file the necessary applications for the client’s wife and children.For more than a year, Kwon told the client the applications had been filed and were pending. However, the client was unable to schedule an appointment with Kwon and when he paid an unannounced visit to Kwon’s office, Kwon admitted he had not filed the applications. He apologized and refunded the client’s advance $2,000 fee.In mitigation, he cooperated with the bar’s investigation and admitted his misconduct to the client. |