Patrice A. Reitz was admitted to the California Bar 29th November 1978, but has since been disbarred. Patrice graduated from Humphrey's Coll SOL.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Patrice A. Reitz |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 29 November 1978 (45 years, 5 months ago) |
| Status | Disbarred |
| Bar Number | 82606 |
Contact
| Current Email | [email protected] |
|---|---|
| Phone Number | 559-237-4026 |
| Fax Number | 559-237-4026 |
Schools
| Law School | Humphrey's Coll SOL (Stockton CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | California St University Fresno (Fresno CA) |
Address
| Current Address | PATRICE A. REITZ-BRAZE, Attorney at Law, 7010 N. MARKS, STE. 103, PMB 133 FRESNO, CA 93711-0285 |
|---|---|
| Map |
History
| 9 February 2008 | Disbarred (16 years, 2 months ago) Disbarment 06-N-15498 |
|---|---|
| 20 August 2007 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (16 years, 8 months ago) Ordered inactive 06-N-15498 |
| 4 May 2007 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (17 years ago) Ordered inactive 06-N-15498 |
| 29 January 2007 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 06-N-15498 (17 years, 3 months ago) |
| 7 October 2006 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (17 years, 7 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 05-O-00616 |
| 18 September 2006 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (17 years, 7 months ago) Suspended, failed to pay fees |
| 30 June 2006 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (17 years, 10 months ago) Suspended, failed to pass Prof.Resp.Exam 02-O-11804 |
| 24 December 2005 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (18 years, 4 months ago) Ordered inactive 05-O-00616 |
| 26 October 2005 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 05-O-00616 (18 years, 6 months ago) |
| 16 September 2005 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (18 years, 7 months ago) Admin Inactive/MCLE noncompliance |
| 16 June 2005 | Active (18 years, 10 months ago) |
| 17 April 2005 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (19 years ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 02-O-11804 |
| 17 September 2004 | Active (19 years, 7 months ago) |
| 16 September 2004 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (19 years, 7 months ago) Suspended, failed to pay fees |
| 11 December 2003 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 02-O-11804 (20 years, 4 months ago) |
| 29 November 1978 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (45 years, 5 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
February 9, 2008 PATRICE A. REITZ [#82606], 56, of Fresno was disbarred Feb. 9, 2008, and ordered to comply with rule 9.20. Reitz failed to comply with rule 955 of the California Rules of Court (since renumbered as rule 9.20) by not submitting to the State Bar Court an affidavit attesting that she notified her clients, courts and other pertinent parties of her 2006 suspension from practice. Failure to comply with rule 955 is grounds for disbarment.She was suspended after the State Bar Court found that she failed to perform legal services competently, communicate with a client or cooperate with the bar’s investigation. She was retained to prepare and file a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) for a client who wanted to obtain a share of her former husband’s pension but the order was deficient.Reitz also was disciplined in 2005, stipulating that she employed a suspended attorney and allowed him to practice law, and she failed to pay court-ordered sanctions, perform legal services competently or advise her client of significant developments in her case.In recommending her disbarment, Judge Pat McElroy wrote, “It would undermine the integrity of the disciplinary system and damage public confidence in the legal profession if (she) were not disbarred for her willful and unexplained disobedience of an order of the California Supreme Court.â€October 7, 2006 PATRICE A. REITZ [#82606], 54, of Fresno was suspended for two years, stayed, actually suspended for six months and until the State Bar Court grants an order to terminate the suspension, and she was ordered to comply with rule 955. If the actual suspension exceeds two years, she must prove her rehabilitation. The order took effect Oct. 7, 2006. In a default proceeding, the State Bar Court found that Reitz committed three acts of misconduct.She was retained to prepare and file a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) for a client who wanted to obtain a share of her former husband’s pension. Reitz did not return any of her client’s many phone calls but, after 10 months, she prepared a QDRO that the client and her ex-husband signed.The pension trust notified Reitz that the QDRO was deficient and, as a result, her client would not receive her full share of the husband’s retirement benefits. It suggested she amend the QDRO before filing it with the court.Reitz did not respond or tell her client of the deficiency. She then closed her office and changed her phone number without providing her new contact information to the client.The pension trust notified the client about the problem with the QDRO and stated it had only one contact with Reitz. The client filed a substitution of counsel, listing herself as an in pro per litigant, and filed the QDRO herself.The bar court found that Reitz failed to perform legal services competently, communicate with a client or cooperate with the bar’s investigation.Reitz was disciplined in 2005 after she stipulated that she employed a suspended attorney and allowed him to practice law, and she failed to pay court-ordered sanctions, perform legal services competently or advise her client of significant developments in her case.April 17, 2005 PATRICE A. REITZ-BRAZE [#82606], 53, of Fresno was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on two years of probation with an actual 60-day suspension and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect April 17, 2005. Reitz-Braze associated with a lawyer who was on interim suspension for a DUI conviction; the lawyer was to provide law clerk/investigator services. She became aware that, contrary to her instructions, he was meeting with potential clients and agreeing to collect fees from those he signed up. She did not terminate their relationship for four months.Reitz-Braze stipulated that she failed to adequately supervise an attorney by permitting him to engage in the unauthorized practice of law.In a second matter, she was hired to handle a client’s appeal, but twice failed to file an opening brief or a motion for relief from default. She did not respond to an order to show cause and was sanctioned $500; she did not pay the sanctions.Reitz-Braze stipulated that she failed to obey court orders.She stipulated in a marital dissolution that she failed to perform legal services competently, respond to client inquiries or keep a client informed of developments in her case. The wife hired Reitz-Braze because she was concerned about maintaining medical benefits her husband was required to provide in a separation judgment.Reitz-Braze was not notified about a hearing, and the dissolution was granted without her knowledge. She did not notify her client or move to set aside the judgment, nor did she respond to numerous phone calls or letters. She took no action to insure that her client continued to receive health benefits.Although Reitz-Braze’s secretary told the client twice that she planned to file a motion to set aside the judgment, Reitz-Braze did not respond to the client’s many phone calls or letters. When a hearing finally was scheduled, Reitz-Braze did not file or serve any motion papers and the hearing did not go forward. She never communicated with the client again.In mitigation, she had no prior record of discipline. |