Woodland Hills, CA 91364
23 March 2013 | Disbarred (12 years, 2 months ago) |
---|---|
24 March 2010 | Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA (15 years, 2 months ago) |
22 July 1994 | Active (30 years, 11 months ago) |
2 July 1993 | Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA (31 years, 11 months ago) |
22 December 1976 | Admitted to The State Bar of California (48 years, 6 months ago) |
March 23, 2013 STEPHEN CURTIS DOWNEY [#70689], 67, of Woodland Hills, was disbarred March 23, 2013, and was ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. Downey stipulated that he failed to comply with the conditions of his disciplinary probation by failing to file his fourth through eighth quarterly probation reports.Downey has been disciplined on multiple prior occasions, the more recent of which he received three years of probation and a two-year suspension for four counts of misconduct which included sharing fees with an eviction service company owned by a non-lawyer and failing to comply with the probation conditions of a 2010 disciplinary order. He did not submit two quarterly probation reports or attend ethics school.Previously, Downey received two years of probation and a 150-day suspension for verifying an unlawful detainer complaint for his clients because he assumed they were out of the country when, in fact, they weren’t. In mitigation, Downey was cooperative with the State Bar and agreed to enter into the stipulation.September 24, 2011 STEPHEN CURTIS DOWNEY, 66, of Woodland Hills was suspended for three years, stayed, placed on three years of probation with a two-year actual suspension and until he makes restitution and proves his rehabilitation, and he was ordered to take the MPRE and comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. The order took effect Sept. 24, 2011. Downey stipulated to four counts of misconduct, including failing to comply with the probation conditions of a 2010 disciplinary order. He did not submit two quarterly probation reports or attend ethics school.He shared legal fees with an eviction service company owned by a non-lawyer. Downey received a portion of the fees his clients paid the company, but the clients never spoke with Downey. He didn’t file a case management conference statement, respond to discovery or tell the clients about various rulings, nor did he tell them that a $560 sanction was imposed against them. The court entered a judgment of $72,779 against Downey’s clients.He stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently or keep his clients informed of significant developments in their case.Downey was suspended and placed on probation in 1993 for failing to perform legal services competently and for making misrepresentations to his client, and again in 2010 for failing to keep his membership records current and for committing acts of moral turpitude.In mitigation, he cooperated with the bar’s investigation.March 24, 2010 STEPHEN CURTIS DOWNEY [#70689], 64, of Canoga Park was suspended for two years stayed, placed on two years of probation with an actual 150-day 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 March 24, 2010. The State Bar Court determined that Downey committed an act of moral turpitude by verifying an unlawful detainer complaint for his clients, who he assumed were out of the county. In fact they were not. He also did not update his address with the bar.Downey represents landlords in the Los Angeles area, maintaining a high volume practice mainly involving unlawful detainers. During eviction proceedings he was handling for landlords, he drafted an unlawful detainer complaint that had to be verified by the landlords. His attempts to contact his clients were unsuccessful, so he concluded they were away. He executed a verification that stated under penalty of perjury that the clients were not in Los Angeles County.When he became aware of his mistake, he immediately notified his clients and had them sign a new verification. With their cooperation, he and the renter’s lawyer tried to reach a settlement. Downey eventually withdrew from the matter when his relationship with his clients deteriorated. They represented themselves in the unlawful detainer action.Downey also moved his law office but didn’t update his records with the bar.In mitigation, no clients were harmed, Downey cooperated with the bar’s investigation and he presented witnesses who testified about his good character.He was disciplined in 1993 for failing to perform legal services competently and making misrepresentations. |