William Patrick Daley is an active member of the California Bar and was admitted 13th December 1972. William graduated from UC Berkeley SOL.
Lawyer Information
| Name | William Patrick Daley |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 13 December 1972 (51 years, 4 months ago) |
| Status | Active |
| Bar Number | 53372 |
Contact
| Current Email | [email protected] |
|---|---|
| Phone Number | 415-999-8132 |
| Fax Number | (866) 691-3696 |
Schools
| Law School | UC Berkeley SOL (Berkeley CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | Claremont McKenna Coll (Claremont CA) |
Address
| Current Address | 2530 Oak Road, No. 102 Walnut Creek, CA 94597 |
|---|---|
| Map | |
| Previous Address | William P. Daley, Esq. 1200 Lakeshore Ave Oakland, CA 94596 |
| Previous Address | William P. Daley, Esq. 1200 Lakeshore Ave Oakland, CA 94606 |
| Previous Address | 1200 Lakeshore Ave, Apt 6E Oakland, CA 94606-1639 |
History
| 21 October 2010 | Active (13 years, 6 months ago) |
|---|---|
| 1 September 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (13 years, 7 months ago) Admin Inactive/MCLE noncompliance |
| 21 January 2010 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 3 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 05-O-01018 |
| 9 July 2009 | Active (14 years, 9 months ago) |
| 1 July 2009 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (14 years, 9 months ago) Suspended, failed to pay fees |
| 13 December 1972 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (51 years, 4 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
January 21, 2010 WILLIAM PATRICK DALEY [#53372], 63, of Walnut Creek was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on three years of probation with an actual nine-month suspension and he was ordered to take the MPRE within one year and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. The order took effect Jan. 21, 2010. Daley stipulated to 14 counts of professional misconduct, several resulting from his association with non-lawyers who performed legal work.He worked part time for Crime Attorneys, a national law practice, owned and operated by non-lawyer Edward Lerner. At some point, Daley and another lawyer entered into an agreement with Lerner, who authorized them to provide legal advice to clients visiting the company’s websites or calling its toll-free numbers. The agreement also authorized another non-lawyer to provide legal advice.Daley admitted that he failed to provide legal services for one client while working for Crime Attorneys, and did not account for another client’s fees. The first client hired the firm to file an appeal for her father-in-law and paid half the $20,000 fee. She was not informed that the work would not begin and the transcripts would not be ordered until the firm received the full fee. Daley never received any money and was directed by Lerner to do no work until the full fee was paid. When the client complained, the father-in-law paid $500, but Daley still did no work, as directed by Lerner. He refunded the $500, but the client never received her $10,000.A second client who believed she would be charged with embezzlement hired Crime Attorneys and paid a $20,000 fee. Lerner assigned the matter to Daley, but he had limited contact with the client. When she was charged criminally, he appeared in court for her voluntary surrender. She subsequently hired a new lawyer who asked for an accounting and a refund of the fees. Lerner denied any responsibility for the matter and Daley did not provide an accounting, although he eventually refunded a portion of the fee.Daley later created American Criminal Defense (ACD), where he allowed a non-attorney employee to handle legal work, negotiate fees and obtain client signatures on fee agreements. He stipulated to misconduct in four matters handled while he operated ACD, including failing to refund unearned fees, splitting fees with a non-lawyer and twice taking fees from a non-client without obtaining the client’s consent. He also enabled a non-lawyer to engage in the unauthorized practice of law.In the final case, he was hired for the limited scope of filing a motion to withdraw his client’s guilty plea. He did so, but the motion was denied and the client was sentenced to prison. He requested his file three times so he could file an appeal, but Daley never returned the file.Daley was privately reproved in 2006 for failing to perform legal services competently. In mitigation, he cooperated with the bar’s investigation and demonstrated remorse for his misconduct. |