Fresno, CA 93704
14 December 2016 | Active (8 years, 4 months ago) |
---|---|
5 July 2016 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (8 years, 10 months ago) Suspended, failed to pass Prof.Resp.Exam 13-O-11381 |
25 August 2015 | Active (9 years, 8 months ago) |
27 May 2015 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (9 years, 11 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 13-O-11381 |
11 January 1966 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (59 years, 4 months ago) |
May 27, 2015 MICHAEL ALAN MILNES [#37609], 80, of Fresno, was suspended from the practice of law for 90 days and ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. He was also placed on three years’ probation and faces a two-year suspension if he does not comply with the terms of his disciplinary probation. The order took effect May 27, 2015. In one matter, Milnes used his client trust account on 18 different occasions for his personal purposes and wrote a check against his trust account when he knew, or should have known, there were insufficient funds. In another matter, he was hired in 2002 to transfer two parcels of property into a couple’s names. The property belonged to a relative of the couple, who’d died. Milnes told the couple it could take seven years to do the transfer so they waited several years to hear from him. Ultimately, they started leaving messages for him and going by his office annually with no luck. In August 2011, Milnes finally told them he’d have the transfer completed by that November. When May came, having not received an update from Milnes, the couple contacted another attorney who checked with the court and found out Milnes had not filed anything. In August 2012, the couple called him and said they would pursue legal action if the transfer was not completed. Milnes said he’d been ill and would complete the work but he did not. Another year passed. After two more failed attempts to contact Milnes at his office, the couple contacted the State Bar.Milnes failed to respond to two letters from a State Bar investigator. He’d never performed any services on the couple’s behalf and ultimately paid them $1,365, representing a refund of the $650 they originally paid plus 10 percent interest from 2003.In mitigation, Milnes made full restitution to his clients and entered into a prefiling stipulation with the State Bar.He had one prior record of discipline, a 2005 private reproval for misconduct stemming from his failure to perform in a client matter and failure to cooperate with a State Bar investigation. |