El Cajon, CA 92020
30 August 2008 | Disbarred (16 years, 9 months ago) Disbarment 07-N-10225 |
---|---|
17 March 2008 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (17 years, 3 months ago) Ordered inactive 07-N-10225 |
8 December 2007 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (17 years, 6 months ago) Ordered inactive 07-N-10225 |
29 August 2007 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 07-N-10225 (17 years, 9 months ago) |
9 July 2006 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (18 years, 11 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 06-PM-10554 |
25 March 2006 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (19 years, 2 months ago) Ordered inactive 06-PM-10554 |
2 February 2006 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 06-PM-10554 (19 years, 4 months ago) |
22 September 2005 | Discipline, probation; no actual susp. 04-O-14209 (19 years, 9 months ago) |
14 December 2004 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 04-O-14209 (20 years, 6 months ago) |
21 December 1977 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (47 years, 6 months ago) |
August 30, 2008 GORDON RANDOLPH WRIGHT [#78644], 64, of El Cajon was disbarred Aug. 30, 2008, and ordered to comply with rule 9.20. In a default proceeding, the State Bar Court found that Wright violated rule 955 of the California Rules of Court, since renumbered as rule 9.20, by not submitting an affidavit stating that he notified his clients, opposing counsel and other pertinent parties of his suspension. Failure to comply with rule 955 is grounds for disbarment.The underlying discipline was a 2006 probation revocation, imposed when Wright did not comply with multiple probationary requirements attached to a 2005 disciplinary order. He had failed to perform legal services with competence, respond to his client’s reasonable status inquiries, take reasonable steps upon termination of employment to avoid prejudice to his client, promptly return his client’s papers, or cooperate with the bar’s investigation.In recommending Wright’s disbarment, Judge Richard A. Honn wrote that Wright “has demonstrated an unwillingness to comply with the professional obligations and rules of court imposed on California attorneys although he has been given opportunities to do so.â€July 9, 2006 GORDON RANDOLPH WRIGHT [#78644], 61, of San Diego Probation was revoked, the previous stay of suspension was lifted and he was actually suspended for six months and was ordered to comply with rule 955. Credit will be given for a period of involuntary inactive enrollment that began March 25, 2006. The order took effect July 9, 2006. Wright failed to comply with probation conditions attached to a 2005 disciplinary order — he did not file one quarterly report, update his membership records address with the State Bar or provide proof that he sent an itemized bill of the work he performed to his former clients, refunded any unearned fees or offered to arbitrate any fee dispute.In the underlying case, Wright stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently, communicate with clients, promptly release client rules or cooperate with the bar's investigation, and he improperly withdrew from representation.September 22, 2005 GORDON RANDOLPH WRIGHT [#78644], 61, of El Cajon was suspended for six months, stayed, placed on one year of probation and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect Sept. 22, 2005. Wright stipulated to five counts of misconduct in a real estate matter in which he represented a couple who paid a $3,500 advance fee. He filed a breach of contract complaint and arbitration demand, but did not file a certificate of service. Another attorney appeared for him at a hearing that was continued twice. The clients appeared alone at a case management conference and told the judge they had not heard from Wright in six months. He instructed them to find a new lawyer. Wright did not execute a substitution of attorney form and the court relieved him as counsel.He stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently, respond to his clients’ status inquiries, release their file to a new lawyer or cooperate with the bar’s investigation, and he improperly withdrew from representation without protecting his clients’ interests.In mitigation, Wright has no prior record of discipline. |