Costas Angelo Ladikos was admitted to the California Bar 30th May 1980, but is now resigned. Costas graduated from Western State University.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Costas Angelo Ladikos |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 30 May 1980 (45 years, 1 month ago) |
| Status | Resigned |
| Bar Number | 92783 |
Schools
| Law School | Western State University (CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | Virginia Tech Inst (Blacksburg VA) |
Address
| Current Address | 1800 E Garry St #213 Santa Ana, CA 92705 |
|---|---|
| Map |
History
| 26 June 1998 | Resigned (26 years, 12 months ago) Resignation with charges pending 98-Q-01868 |
|---|---|
| 14 April 1998 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (27 years, 2 months ago) Vol.inactive(tender of resign.w/charges) 98-Q-01868 |
| 16 January 1998 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (27 years, 5 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 95-N-14580 |
| 8 January 1996 | Active (29 years, 5 months ago) |
| 23 October 1995 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (29 years, 8 months ago) Ordered inactive 95-N-14580 |
| 17 August 1995 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 95-N-14580 (29 years, 10 months ago) |
| 26 May 1995 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (30 years, 1 month ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 92-O-20909 |
| 23 August 1994 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 93-O-15667 (30 years, 10 months ago) |
| 22 February 1994 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 92-O-20909 (31 years, 4 months ago) |
| 30 May 1980 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (45 years, 1 month ago) |
Discipline Summaries
January 16, 1998 COSTAS ANGELO LADIKOS [#92783], 45, of Bellflower was suspended for three years, stayed, placed on four years of probation with an actual 20-month suspension and until he proves his rehabilitation, and was ordered to comply with rule 955. The order took effect Jan. 16, 1998. The State Bar sought review in Ladikos’ case, asking that he be disbarred, but the bar court’s review department upheld the hearing judge’s recommendation, adding one year to the period of suspension.Ladikos was disciplined in 1995, stipulating to misconduct in two client matters in which he appeared without authority and stipulated to a judgment without the client’s consent; represented parties with conflicting interests; misrepresented the status of a case to a client; misappropriated funds held in trust; and failed to communicate with clients, perform legal services competently, report to the bar a $60,000 judgment for fraud committed in his professional capacity and failed to cooperate with the bar’s investigation. As a result of that discipline, Ladikos was required to comply with rule 955 by informing his clients of his suspension and submitting an affidavit to that effect with the Supreme Court. He had only four clients at the time and spoke with each about his situation. He referred them to other counsel and returned their files. However, he did not notify them in writing or submit an affidavit to the Supreme Court on time.Although disbarment is generally recommended for non-compliance with rule 955, the review department noted that when extenuating circumstances are present, a lesser discipline is possible. Cases cited by bar attorneys were based on more extensive misconduct or more serious aggravating circumstances, the court said.In addition, Ladikos suffers from serious psychological difficulties. |