Norman L Goodfriend Jr was admitted to the California Bar 7th August 1978, but has since been disbarred. Norman graduated from San Fernando Valley College of Law.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Norman L Goodfriend Jr |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 7 August 1978 (46 years, 9 months ago) |
| Status | Disbarred |
| Bar Number | 81136 |
Contact
| Phone Number | 661-269-8221 |
|---|
Schools
| Law School | San Fernando Valley College of Law (Woodland Hills CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | Coe Coll (Cedar Rapids IA) |
Address
| Current Address | 900 Searchlight Ranch Rd Acton, CA 93510 |
|---|---|
| Map |
History
| 5 April 2002 | Disbarred (23 years, 1 month ago) Disbarment 98-O-02329 |
|---|---|
| 14 October 2000 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (24 years, 6 months ago) Ordered inactive 98-O-02329 |
| 10 November 1999 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 98-O-02329 (25 years, 5 months ago) |
| 7 August 1978 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (46 years, 9 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
April 5, 2002 NORMAN L. GOODFRIEND [81136], 56, of Acton was disbarred April 5, 2002, and ordered to comply with rule 955. The bar court's review department upheld a hearing judge's recommendation that Goodfriend be disbarred because he misappropriated $93,251 of trust funds and repeatedly deceived his client and her subsequent attorney about his theft, including fabricating a bank record of a certificate of deposit. He stipulated to his misconduct, but argued that he should be suspended, not disbarred.Goodfriend was hired by a real estate broker who claimed she was owed an $86,000 commission after the sale of a commercial parcel. The disputed funds were held in the property escrow, and after a lawsuit was filed, the funds were transferred to the trust account of her first attorney, earning 4.67 percent interest.When the broker hired Goodfriend, the first attorney provided a certified check for $93,251.36, representing the disputed commission and accrued interest.Goodfriend said after he deposited the money in his trust account, he began to misappropriate it almost immediately. Within a week, he took $16,000, within two months $41,607 and within five months he had used all but $116. He admitted he spent the money for personal expenses, including supporting a cocaine habit.When the client tried to get information about her account, Goodfriend promised to send statements, but he never did. She later fired him and filed a report with the Los Angeles police accusing him of embezzlement.Meeting with her new attorney, Goodfriend said he held the trust funds in a certificate of deposit and provided a copy of what he said was a bank document showing an account balance of more than $102,000.The bank, however, said no such account existed, and the court ordered Goodfriend to give the missing money to his former client, which he failed to do.Eventually, the court entered judgment against the client in the dispute over the commission. Goodfriend sent a $75,000 check to the opposing attorney, and sent an additional $21,475 about a year later. However, had the original money been kept in a trust account earning 4.67 percent interest, it would have been worth $100,625.91.Goodfriend admitted his actions involved moral turpitude.In mitigation, Goodfriend submitted evidence of his heavy drinking and cocaine usage at the time of his misconduct and of his subsequent recovery. When he realized that he had misappropriated client funds, he was "horrified at his conduct," according to court papers.Goodfriend presented testimony of six witnesses who endorsed his recovery, he participates in community service, and he served as a superior court mediator and arbitrator for five years. Nonetheless, the review department found that his offenses were "grievous," that he engaged in an extended practice of deceit and that had he been convicted of grand theft or embezzlement, he would have been summarily disbarred.It agreed with the hearing judge that Goodfriend should be required to "undergo the strict evaluation of a formal reinstatement proceeding" should he wish to be reinstated to practice, when he can show evidence of sustained exemplary conduct. |