Sheridan, OR 97378
23 May 2004 | Disbarred (21 years, 1 month ago) Disbarment 03-N-03283 |
---|---|
15 December 2003 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (21 years, 6 months ago) Ordered inactive 03-N-03283 |
9 November 2003 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (21 years, 7 months ago) Ordered inactive 03-N-03283 |
15 September 2003 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 03-N-03283 (21 years, 9 months ago) |
5 July 2003 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (21 years, 11 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 02-J-11316 |
13 July 2002 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (22 years, 11 months ago) Ordered inactive 02-J-11316 |
22 April 2002 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 02-J-11316 (23 years, 2 months ago) |
1 January 1979 | Inactive (46 years, 5 months ago) |
28 June 1966 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (59 years ago) |
May 23, 2004 DAVID R. KLUGE [#38800], 63, of Sheridan, Ore. was disbarred May 23, 2004, and was ordered to comply with rule 955. Kluge failed to comply with rule 955, as required by a 2003 disciplinary order. He did not submit to the Supreme Court an affidavit stating that he had notified his clients and other pertinent parties about his suspension from practice. Failure to comply with rule 955 is grounds for disbarment.The underlying discipline occurred in Oregon. Kluge committed an act of dishonesty by representing that he was a notary public when he was not, he practiced law without professional liability insurance from Oregon’s professional liability fund, and he claimed he was entitled to an exemption from the malpractice insurance requirement because he did not engage in private law practice, when in fact he did.July 6, 2003 DAVID RICHARD KLUGE [#38800], 62, of Sheridan, Ore., was suspended for three years, stayed, actually suspended for two years and until he takes and passes the MPRE, the State Bar Court terminates the suspension and he proves his rehabilitation. He also was ordered to comply with rule 955. The order took effect July 6, 2003. Kluge was suspended from practice in Oregon in 2001 for misrepresenting that he was a notary public, for practicing law without professional liability insurance, and for claiming he was exempt from carrying malpractice insurance because he did not engage in the private practice of law, when in fact he did.Each of the violations would have resulted in discipline had they been committed in California.Kluge did not participate in the proceedings because he has been inactive in California for 25 years and said he could not foresee returning to active status. His default was entered. |