Santa Monica, CA 90401-1338
5 March 1998 | Active (27 years, 2 months ago) |
---|---|
1 November 1997 | Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA (27 years, 6 months ago) |
27 June 1969 | Admitted to The State Bar of California (55 years, 10 months ago) |
September 19, 1997 THOMAS MICHAEL BANKS [#44416], 33, of Santa Monica was suspended for three years, stayed, placed on probation for two years with an actual 120-day suspension, and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year and comply with rule 955. The order took effect Sept. 19, 1997, but the period of actual suspension was temporarily stayed until Nov. 1, 1997. Banks represented two clients, one of whom was his law clerk, in a breach of contract matter involving a real estate purchase. The case was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court. Banks and his employee entered into a written fee agreement under which Banks represented the clients at a rate valued at $150 per hour in exchange for three hours of work by the law clerk, valued at $50 per hour. Due to the nature of the arrangement, Banks never submitted accountings or billing statements to his clients. Banks tried and won the case and submitted a motion for attorney’s fees amounting to more than $18,000. In his declaration, he indicated he billed his clients at a rate of $250 an hour. At the judge’s request, he submitted a fee agreement and 11 billing statements, all false. The court awarded attorney’s fees to Banks’ clients totaling $18,312.50. Some time later, after he was substituted out of the case by the client who was now an attorney, Banks tried to collect attorney’s fees from the former law clerk, because she had not provided the law clerk services pursuant to their fee agreement. Banks sued her in the Santa Monica Superior Court, alleging actual damages of more than $11,000. He arrived at that figure by using his $150 an hour fee. The judge hearing the case noticed the discrepancy between Banks’ hourly rates in the two cases, and also determined that Banks’ clients had never seen the fee agreement or the 11 bills Banks submitted in the first matter. In addition, the clients’ signatures were forged on the fee agreement. Banks stipulated that he misled the court by making false statements and committed acts of moral turpitude. In mitigation, he has no prior record of discipline since his admission to practice law in 1969, he did not harm clients, and was candid and cooperated with the bar. |