Mark Robert Moore was first admitted to the California Bar 28th June 1977, but is now no longer eligible to practice. Mark graduated from Western State University.

Lawyer Information

NameMark Robert Moore
First Admitted28 June 1977 (47 years, 10 months ago)
StatusNot Eligible to Practice
Bar Number74804

Contact

Phone Number802-592-3310
Fax Number802-592-3317

Schools

Law SchoolWestern State University (CA)
Undergraduate SchoolUniversity of California San Diego (La Jolla CA)

Address

Current AddressP O Box 276
Peacham, VT 05862
Map

History

1 July 2009Not eligible to practice law in CA (15 years, 10 months ago)
Admin Inactive/MCLE noncompliance
23 February 2007Discipline w/actual suspension 05-PM-01175 (18 years, 2 months ago)
14 May 2005Not eligible to practice law in CA (19 years, 11 months ago)
Ordered inactive 05-PM-01175
16 September 2004Not eligible to practice law in CA (20 years, 7 months ago)
Suspended, failed to pay fees
30 October 2003Active (21 years, 6 months ago)
31 August 2003Not eligible to practice law in CA (21 years, 8 months ago)
Discipline w/actual suspension 02-O-13248
1 November 2002Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 02-O-13248 (22 years, 6 months ago)
18 September 2001Active (23 years, 7 months ago)
19 August 2001Not eligible to practice law in CA (23 years, 8 months ago)
Discipline w/actual suspension 00-O-11298
6 September 2000Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 00-O-11298 (24 years, 8 months ago)
28 June 1977Admitted to the State Bar of California (47 years, 10 months ago)

Discipline Summaries

February 23, 2007

MARK ROBERT MOORE [#74804], 56, of Peacham, Vt. was revoked, the previous stay of suspension was lifted and he was suspended for two years and until he proves his rehabilitation, and was ordered to take the MPRE, comply with rule 955 and prove that he completed ethics school. Credit toward the actual suspension will be given for a period of involuntary inactive enrollment that began May 14, 2005. The order took effect Feb. 23, 2007.

The State Bar Court review department upheld a hearing judge’s recommendation that Moore’s probation be revoked because he filed five probation reports late, did not file one report at all and did not provide proof that he made restitution. Moore had sought review, saying he was financially unable to make restitution or pay the required costs of his first disciplinary proceeding. The review court found his arguments “unmeritorious.”

Originally disciplined in 2001 for failing to perform legal services competently, promptly return a client’s file or refund unearned fees, Moore was suspended again in 2003 for failing to meet probation conditions. The latest discipline resulted from more probation violations.

August 31, 2003

MARK ROBERT MOORE [#74804], 53, of Peacham, Vt. was suspended for two years, stayed, and was placed on two years of probation with a 60-day actual suspension. The order took effect Aug. 31, 2003.

Moore stipulated that he failed to comply with probation conditions attached to a 2001 disciplinary order. He did not make restitution to his client on time 11 times.

Although Moore gave the client three checks, they were returned for insufficient funds.

He also did not submit quarterly probation reports on time, or else submitted defective reports.

Moore originally was disciplined for failing to perform legal services competently, communicate with a client, refund unearned fees and return a client file.

In mitigation, Moore has financial problems that limit his ability to make restitution.

August 19, 2001

MARK ROBERT MOORE [#74804], 50, of Solana Beach was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on probation for 18 months with a 30-day actual suspension, and was ordered to pay restitution and take the MPRE. The order took effect Aug. 19, 2001.

Moore stipulated to performing incompetently when he failed to represent a client before the IRS and the Hawaii Department of Taxation. He took on the case, in which the IRS believed a client’s family trust was a sham, and took $5,000 in advance fees. But he failed to provide any representation or obtain power of attorney.

The client received several IRS letters stating the family was being assessed more than $30,000 in taxes and penalties. Moore drafted a letter to the Hawaii tax department but did not send it; the client sent it instead. When the client drafted a letter to the IRS and asked Moore to review it, Moore told the client to send the letter himself.

From June to November 1999, the client wrote and called Moore several times with information, but the attorney failed to respond to inquiries. At one point, he told the client everything was under control, although the client continued to receive correspondence from the IRS. When the client terminated Moore’s employment, he failed to promptly return documents and all unearned fees.

In mitigation, Moore has no record of prior discipline.