Tim Chih Ting Lin was admitted to the California Bar 10th June 2009, but has since been disbarred. Tim graduated from Whittier Coll SOL.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Tim Chih Ting Lin |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 10 June 2009 (14 years, 10 months ago) |
| Status | Disbarred |
| Bar Number | 263885 |
Contact
| Phone Number | 626-629-8546 |
|---|
Schools
| Law School | Whittier Coll SOL (CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | Occidental Coll (Los Angeles CA) |
Address
| Current Address | Tim C. Lin, 20821 Rocky Point Ln Diamond Bar, CA 91789 |
|---|---|
| Map |
History
| 15 October 2015 | Disbarred (8 years, 6 months ago) Disbarment 14-O-01235 |
|---|---|
| 12 April 2015 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (9 years ago) Ordered inactive 14-O-01235 |
| 18 December 2014 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 14-O-01235 (9 years, 4 months ago) |
| 10 June 2009 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (14 years, 10 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
October 15, 2015 TIM CHIH LIN [#263885], 35, of Diamond Bar, was disbarred Oct. 15, 2015 and ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. Lin stipulated to misconduct in three matters in which he fabricated elaborate excuses as to why he failed to follow through with his duties as an attorney. In one matter, he took over a case for his boss Stephen J. Thomas but failed to file an opposition to a motion for summary judgment. As a result, the motion for summary judgment was granted but Lin did not inform the clients or Thomas. Lin went on to mislead them for more than a year, claiming that the motion for summary judgment was delayed because the parties were trying to conduct a mediation to resolve the case. He also said the mediation and the hearing on the motion on summary judgment had been delayed because opposing counsel’s newborn son was ill and required heart surgery. He later claimed that the little boy had died.In another matter he handled while working for Thomas, Lin was supposed to take the deposition of a woman in his clients’ breach of contract case, but did not and claimed that the deposition had been canceled and reset and the trial rescheduled. He then filed an ex parte application to continue the trial for 30 days, falsely stating that Thomas’ mom had suffered a stroke and he had to travel to Florida. He subsequently requested a continuance due to personal problems experienced by Thomas but there were not issues affecting the case, and Thomas was not actually the trial counsel, Lin was. Lin then failed to tell the clients about a court date and dismissed their cross complaint without their permission. He proceeded to conduct the trial without their knowledge, not calling any witnesses or presenting any evidence on their behalf. When the court issued its ruling against the clients, he did not tell them, concealing all notices and documents he received from the court from them and his employer. When the couple received an abstract of judgment, Lin lied about it and said it had been issued in error, fabricating a letter to back up his claim. Lin admitted his deception after one of the client’s bank accounts was levied.In the third matter, he failed to perform any services of value on behalf of a client, dismissed her case without her knowledge and falsely represented to her and Thomas that he had obtained a default judgment on her behalf when he hadn’t. He also claimed he was pursuing collection of a judgment on the client’s behalf when he knew the proceedings had been dismissed.In mitigation, Lin entered into a pretrial stipulation with the State Bar. |