Karen Croft Nelson was admitted to the California Bar 3rd August 1978, but has since been disbarred. Karen graduated from Western State University.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Karen Croft Nelson |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 3 August 1978 (46 years, 10 months ago) |
| Status | Disbarred |
| Bar Number | 81049 |
Contact
| Phone Number | 916-448-2300 |
|---|---|
| Fax Number | 916-443-3271 |
Schools
| Law School | Western State University (CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | Western State University (CA) |
Address
| Current Address | Law Ofc Robert C Cook, 1108 2nd St Sacramento, CA 95814 |
|---|---|
| Map |
History
| 29 October 1997 | Disbarred (27 years, 7 months ago) Disbarment 96-N-04858 |
|---|---|
| 25 April 1997 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (28 years, 1 month ago) Ordered inactive 96-N-04858 |
| 24 October 1996 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (28 years, 8 months ago) Ordered inactive 96-N-04858 |
| 14 August 1996 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 96-N-04858 (28 years, 10 months ago) |
| 22 March 1996 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (29 years, 3 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 94-O-11023 |
| 1 March 1995 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 94-O-11023 (30 years, 3 months ago) |
| 30 August 1994 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 94-H-15724 (30 years, 9 months ago) |
| 26 May 1994 | Public reproval with/duties 93-O-13200 (31 years ago) |
| 14 February 1994 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (31 years, 4 months ago) Ordered inactive 93-O-13200 |
| 23 November 1993 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 93-O-13200 (31 years, 7 months ago) |
| 4 January 1985 | Active (40 years, 5 months ago) |
| 11 March 1982 | Inactive (43 years, 3 months ago) |
| 11 March 1982 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (43 years, 3 months ago) Ordered inactive |
| 3 August 1978 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (46 years, 10 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
October 29, 1997 KAREN CROFT NELSON [#81049], 56, of Shingle Springs was disbarred Oct. 29, 1997, following her failure to comply with rule 955, a requirement of a February 1996 disciplinary order. She was again ordered to comply with rule 955. Nelson did not abide by conditions of a public reproval which led to the February 1996 discipline order and a suspension for 60 days and until she filed a required declaration.The court also ordered her to comply with rule 955 if she failed to file the declaration and her actual suspension lasted 90 days or longer.The hearing department of the State Bar Court found that Nelson wilfully failed to comply with the February 1996 disciplinary order.Although the Office of Trial Counsel had requested that Nelson be prevented from petitioning for reinstatement for 10 years, the recommendation was denied by the hearing judge.The judge said such action was inappropriate because disciplinary charges were filed before the effective date of amended rule 662, which currently is before the Supreme Court for approval.March 22, 1996 KAREN CROFT NELSON [#81049], 54, of Shingle Springs was actually suspended for 60 days, effective March 22, 1996, and until she files a specified declaration recommended by the hearing department of the State Bar Court. If the period of actual suspension is less than two years, she will be placed on probation for two years. If she remains actually suspended for two years or more, she will not be placed on probation, but will remain actually suspended until she provides proof of her rehabilitation and fitness to practice law. If the period of actual suspension exceeds 90 days, she must comply with Rule 955. She also was ordered to pass the CPRE. In this default matter, Nelson was found culpable of failing to comply with probation conditions from a public reproval, properly withdraw from employment, return a client file and cooperate with the State Bar. In another matter, Nelson was hired by a woman in August 1992 to substitute in as attorney in a divorce. Nelson failed to make an appearance at a hearing, but assured the client that everything was being handled. In November 1992, the client told Nelson she was terminating her employment. Nelson left a message on her answering machine that she could pick up a substitution of attorney form from her office.However, when the client arrived to pick up the form, she was told by a receptionist that Nelson had vacated the office and removed all of her files. Nelson missed another appearance and the client eventually signed a marital agreement without the benefit of counsel because she was unable to afford another attorney. In the disciplinary probation matter, Nelson was publicly reproved in April 1994. She neglected to file required quarterly probation reports and did not provide proof of psychiatric or psychological treatment within the allotted time period. |