Steven Mark Alexander was admitted to the California Bar 21st February 2003, but is now resigned. Steven graduated from San Joaquin COL.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Steven Mark Alexander |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 21 February 2003 (22 years, 2 months ago) |
| Status | Resigned |
| Bar Number | 224393 |
Contact
| Phone Number | 209-947-0710 |
|---|
Schools
| Law School | San Joaquin COL (Fresno CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | California St University Stanislaus (Turlock CA) |
Address
| Current Address | P O Box 548 Merced, CA 95341 |
|---|---|
| Map |
History
| 21 May 2006 | Resigned (18 years, 12 months ago) Resignation with charges pending 06-Q-11714 |
|---|---|
| 11 April 2006 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (19 years, 1 month ago) Vol.inactive(tender of resign.w/charges) |
| 3 November 2005 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (19 years, 6 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 04-O-11166 |
| 24 January 2005 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (20 years, 3 months ago) Ordered inactive 04-O-11166 |
| 21 June 2004 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 04-O-11166 (20 years, 11 months ago) |
| 21 February 2003 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (22 years, 2 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
November 3, 2005 STEVEN MARK ALEXANDER [#224393], 46, of Merced was suspended for two years, stayed, actually suspended for 90 days and until he pays sanctions and the State Bar Court grants a motion to terminate the suspension and he was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 955. If the actual suspension exceeds two years, he must prove his rehabilitation. The order took effect Nov. 3, 2005. In a default proceeding, the bar court found that Alexander committed five acts of misconduct in a divorce case. He appeared at two hearings but did not appear for the trial, leaving his client without representation. He did not appear at two subsequent hearings or file a trial brief and did not pay court-ordered sanctions.He also disconnected his phone and moved his office without telling the client how she could reach him.The court found that Alexander violated a court order, failed to perform legal services competently, communicate with a client or maintain a current address with the State Bar, and he withdrew from employment in a proceeding without obtaining the court’s permission. |