Pasadena, CA 91109-2496
9 August 2012 | Disbarred (12 years, 10 months ago) Disbarment 10-O-06758 |
---|---|
12 September 2011 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (13 years, 9 months ago) |
31 May 1979 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (46 years ago) |
August 9, 2012 CEDRIC TRONCOSO, 61, of Pasadena was disbarred Aug. 9, 2012, and was ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. The State Bar Court found that Troncoso committed nine acts of misconduct in two matters, including misappropriating almost $82,000 of client funds.He received $30,000, a portion of the net proceeds from the sale of his divorce client’s home, and deposited the money in his client trust account. The parties were entitled to the money. He gave his client $15,000 and told her repeatedly that he had mailed the remaining funds to her, according to the client. He later told her the divorce judgment was vague with respect to the remaining $15,000 and he needed to file an additional pleading before distributing any more money.The husband believed the remaining money was to be credited to his delinquent child support, but a review of the judgment indicates that was not the case. Troncoso never filed a stipulation that both parties signed. The balance in his client trust account was $12,190 and he offered his client that amount if she gave him more fees (for preparation of the stipulation he never filed). The client disputed the fee and Troncoso eventually gave her $15,000.Troncoso stipulated that he failed to pay client funds promptly, maintain client funds in trust or cooperate with the bar’s investigation, and he committed acts of moral turpitude by misappropriating almost $15,000 and making misrepresentations.He substituted into another divorce case and deposited $102,000 from the sale of his client’s home into his trust account. He disbursed $35,097.72, without court approval, to his client, the husband. He allowed the balance of his trust account to drop to $140.98 and misappropriated $66,902.28.Troncoso stipulated that he misappropriated client funds and sought to mislead a judge and he failed to maintain funds in trust or obey a court order.In mitigation, he had no prior discipline record and suffered emotional difficulties.He argued that a two-year suspension would be sufficient and that the missing funds have been repaid. However, Judge Richard Platel said although he was sympathetic to Troncoso’s emotional stress, his misappropriation of a total of $66,902.28 “is not insignificantly small†and the mitigation was not compelling. |