Patrick Dayton McNeal

Patrick Dayton McNeal was admitted to the California Bar 20th December 1974, but has since been disbarred. Patrick graduated from UCLA SOL.

Lawyer Information

Name	Patrick Dayton McNeal
First Admitted	20 December 1974 (50 years, 6 months ago)
Status	Disbarred
Bar Number	62102

Contact

Current Email	[email protected]
Phone Number	714-836-0052
Fax Number	714-836-0056

Schools

Law School	UCLA SOL (Los Angeles CA)
Undergraduate School	University of California Irvine (Irvine CA)

Address

Current Address	Law Office of Patrick D. McNeal, 714 N Spurgeon St Santa Ana, CA 92701
Map

History

26 February 2010	Disbarred (15 years, 3 months ago) Disbarment 07-O-10023
5 October 2009	Not eligible to practice law in CA (15 years, 8 months ago) Ordered inactive 07-O-10023
22 June 2009	Not eligible to practice law in CA (16 years ago) Ordered inactive 07-O-10023
2 February 2005	Active (20 years, 4 months ago)
4 December 2004	Not eligible to practice law in CA (20 years, 6 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 04-N-10546
21 November 2004	Active (20 years, 7 months ago)
15 April 2004	Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 04-N-10546 (21 years, 2 months ago)
21 November 2003	Not eligible to practice law in CA (21 years, 7 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 97-O-16522
28 March 2001	Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 99-O-11198 (24 years, 2 months ago)
24 December 1998	Discipline, probation; no actual susp. 94-O-16879 (26 years, 6 months ago)
15 July 1997	Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 94-O-16879 (27 years, 11 months ago)
4 February 1997	Active (28 years, 4 months ago)
21 December 1996	Not eligible to practice law in CA (28 years, 6 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 95-PM-10628
17 July 1994	Discipline, probation; no actual susp. 93-O-10542 (30 years, 11 months ago)
20 December 1974	Admitted to the State Bar of California (50 years, 6 months ago)

Discipline Summaries

February 26, 2010

PATRICK DAYTON McNEAL [#62102], 61, of Santa Ana was disbarred Feb. 26, 2010, and was ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.

In a default proceeding that followed six prior disciplinary orders in 20 years, the State Bar Court found that McNeal committed 39 counts of misconduct in five matters. The court found that he failed to return unearned fees, perform legal services, account for client funds, communicate with his client and cooperate with the barâ€™s investigation. He also committed acts of moral turpitude, commingled personal and client funds in his trust account and abandoned clients.

In recommending McNealâ€™s disbarment, Judge Donald F. Miles said McNeal has â€œrepeatedly committed misconduct during 21 of the 35 years of his practice. This is (his) seventh disciplinary proceeding. Probation and suspension have proven inadequate to prevent continued misconduct. And, no compelling mitigation has been shown.â€

In all five cases, McNeal represented criminal defendants but did little or no work. When the clients sought refunds of their fees, he either issued a check against insufficient funds or ignored the requests.

He deposited personal and client funds in his trust account and either wrote bad checks or tried to make electronic transfers of funds.

December 12, 2004

PATRICK D. McNEAL [#62102], 55, of Brea was actually suspended for 60 days, beginning Dec.12, 2004.

McNeal did not comply with rule 955, as required by a 2003 disciplinary order. He submitted two incomplete compliance affidavits before submitting a corrected version late.

He has been disciplined five previous times; the underlying matter was a suspension imposed for committing seven acts of misconduct in two cases.

November 21, 2003

PATRICK DAYTON McNEAL [#62102], 54, of Brea was suspended for three years, stayed, placed on three years of probation with a one-year actual suspension and was ordered to make restitution, take the MPRE and comply with rule 955. The order took effect Nov. 21, 2003.

The State Bar Court found that McNeal committed seven acts of misconduct in two cases.

In the first, he agreed to represent a client in a real property matter the day before he was scheduled to begin an actual suspension from practice; the suspension lasted about six weeks. Nonetheless, the client never heard anything from McNeal despite inquiries for a year and a half.

The case was to be handled from McNeal's Rancho Cucamonga office by an associate who handled civil matters. After the associate left and the case was transferred to another attorney, the issues were researched, but no further work was done. McNeal acknowledged that he did not properly supervise the case and he ultimately closed the Rancho Cucamonga office.

The client's unresolved problem adversely affected her credit report, which shows a bankruptcy that her brother-in-law filed but is attributed to her. Threatened with foreclosure, the client was fearful her house would be sold. She negotiated the payment of a fraudulent loan on the home herself.

The bar court found that McNeal failed to respond to client inquiries, refund a $2,500 unearned fee or cooperate with the bar's investigation.

In the second matter, McNeal practiced law while suspended by representing a client in a criminal case. After the suspension ended and prior to the trial, the prosecution noted that McNeal had not provided a witness list and he also was sanctioned $400 for not being prepared to proceed to trial. An inexperienced attorney who had never selected a jury did so.

Just prior to the trial, McNeal asked the client for additional fees, but the client said he was unable to pay. McNeal encouraged him to plead guilty with an open plea, one without an agreement as to custody time. The bar court found that McNeal never computed the client's exposure, provided accurate information and gave the client the erroneous hope of probation and possible weekends in custody. McNeal told him it was realistic to expect a three-year sentence.

The court found that McNeal pushed the client to enter into the plea agreement. It also found McNeal did not properly prepare for trial.

The client pleaded no contest but later changed his mind. On McNeal's advice, he did not appear at a meeting with his probation officer and was arrested and remained in jail for nearly a year and a half pending a hearing on withdrawing his plea.

A new lawyer filed a motion to withdraw his plea which the court granted, finding that the original plea was not intelligently entered because of McNeal's erroneous advice, lack of preparation and ineffective assistance.

The bar court found that McNeal engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, committed an act of moral turpitude, failed to perform legal services competently and did not cooperate with the bar's investigation.

He has been disciplined four times previously, beginning in 1991.

In mitigation, he has performed pro bono work through the Orange County Bar Foundation.

December 21, 1996

The probation of PATRICK DAYTON McNEAL [#62102], 47, of Newport Beach was revoked and the previous stay of suspension was lifted Dec. 21, 1996. He was placed on actual suspension for 45 days.

McNeal was suspended and placed on probation in 1994 as a result of misconduct involving one client.

After filing a marital dissolution petition for his client, he failed to return her phone calls for two years, or respond to a request for a status report or to a letter from another attorney requesting documentation on the client's behalf. A member of his staff falsely informed the client her divorce was finalized. In addition, after telling the client that he failed to handle her case competently but would conclude the matter by year's end, he again failed to perform services.

As part of the discipline imposed, McNeal was ordered to file quarterly probation reports as a condition of probation.

McNeal did not receive a copy of either the Supreme Court's discipline order or a probation monitor's reminder until months later and he failed to file his first probation report. The State Bar Court found that because of the confusion, he was not guilty of failing to file his first report.

However, the court said he should have filed subsequent reports but did not.

McNeal was privately reproved in 1991 when he failed to appear at court hearings for his client or inform him of hearing dates. As a result, bench warrants were issued for his client's arrest, and McNeal was fired.

He failed to communicate with his client, competently perform legal service and return unearned fees.

Patrick McNeal