Thomas Alan Stanley was first admitted to the California Bar 15th January 1970, but is now no longer eligible to practice. Thomas graduated from UCLA SOL.

Lawyer Information

NameThomas Alan Stanley
First Admitted15 January 1970 (54 years, 3 months ago)
StatusNot Eligible to Practice
Bar Number45990

Contact

Current Email[email protected]
Phone Number818-986-1506
Fax Number818-691-0432

Schools

Law SchoolUCLA SOL (Los Angeles CA)
Undergraduate SchoolCalifornia Lutheran University (Thousand Oaks CA)

Address

Current Address16133 Ventura Blvd Ste 700
Encino, CA 91436-2406
Map

History

16 October 2020Not eligible to practice law in CA (3 years, 6 months ago)
Ordered inactive
1 October 2020Not eligible to practice law in CA (3 years, 7 months ago)
Admin Inactive/MCLE noncompliance
19 August 2019Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 19-O-30414 (4 years, 8 months ago)
15 April 2017Active (7 years ago)
15 October 2016Not eligible to practice law in CA (7 years, 6 months ago)
Discipline w/actual suspension 15-O-13451
22 January 2016Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 15-O-13451 (8 years, 3 months ago)
2 March 2011Active (13 years, 2 months ago)
1 November 2010Not eligible to practice law in CA (13 years, 6 months ago)
Actual Suspension Delayed 00-O-13432
21 October 2010Probation with conditions 00-O-13432 (13 years, 6 months ago)
9 May 2002Law Practice Restricted 01-TE-04031 (21 years, 12 months ago)
15 January 1970Admitted to the State Bar of California (54 years, 3 months ago)

Discipline Summaries

October 15, 2016

THOMAS ALAN STANLEY [#45990], 73, of Encino, was suspended from the practice of law for six months and ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. He was also placed on two years’ probation and faces a two-year suspension if he fails to comply with the terms of his disciplinary probation. The order took effect Oct. 15, 2016.

In 2005, Stanley was hired to represent a client in removal proceedings following his arrest for alien smuggling. He repeatedly failed to properly fill out an immigration application and was granted 12 court continuances before the court declared the application abandoned and ordered his client removed. Stanley later filed an appeal but didn’t file a supporting brief by deadline and the appeal was dismissed. The client hired a new attorney and filed a complaint against Stanley, who did not respond to a State Bar investigator looking into the allegations against him.

Stanley had one prior record of discipline. In mitigation, he was suffering extreme physical difficulties at the time of his misconduct and entered into a pretrial stipulation with the State Bar.

October 21, 2010

THOMAS ALAN STANLEY [#45990], 67, of Encino was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on five years of probation with a four-month actual suspension and until he makes restitution to seven clients and he was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. If the actual suspension exceeds two years, he must prove his rehabilitation. The order took effect Oct. 21, 2010.

Stanley successfully completed the Alternative Discipline Program (ADP) for attorneys with substance abuse or mental health issues. He admitted to extensive misconduct in multiple separate client matters, including numerous acts of moral turpitude and making financial arrangements with non-lawyers. Other misconduct included failures to competently perform legal services (26 matters), promptly release client file, (six matters), refund unearned fees (18 matters), account for client funds (12 matters) or communicate with clients (16 matters) and he improperly withdrew from employment in 14 matters.

Stanley’s problems stemmed from his affiliation with American Justice Publications, Inc. (AJP) and Professional Accounts Service Corporation (PAS), which do business together in Woodland Hills. Both are incorporated in Nevada, but only AJP is registered with the California Secretary of State. In addition, a disbarred lawyer acts as the secretary for both companies.

Stanley entered into a contract with AJP for various services, including phone, paralegal, advertising and accounting services for which he was charged $15,080 per month. All fees were to be collected by PAS and deposited into a bank account over which Stanley had no control. Over the course of the contract, Stanley was paid a 30 percent split of all fees collected from his clients. He also advertised in AJP’s magazine, which was distributed to jail and prison inmates. AJP and PAS screened telephone calls from prospective clients, accepted advanced attorneys’ fees, obtained signed promissory notes on Stanley’s behalf and negotiated and signed fee agreements.

In eight matters, for example, he was hired to file criminal appeals before the Ninth Circuit, but he failed to file opening briefs and was sanctioned for disobeying court orders. Most of the appeals were dismissed for failure to prosecute and several clients were advised to seek new counsel.

He also was retained by jailed inmates facing criminal charges, but he abandoned most of those clients, didn’t return phone calls, their files or unearned fees and he did not perform legal services competently.

In mitigation, Stanley had no discipline record in more than 28 years of practice, he cooperated with the bar’s investigation and submitted letters attesting to his good character.