Franklin Sidney 37135 State Bar Discipline Binder2

THE STATE BAR OFFICE OF STATE BAR COURT
OF CALIFORNIA Senior Ezecu~ve. STUART A. FORSYTH
COURT CLERK’S OFFICE, 818 WEST SEVENTH STREET, SUITE 201, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-3432 (213) 689-6200
PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL
NOTICE ACCOMPANYING SERVICE OF

STIPULATION AS TO FACTS AND DISPOSITION
AND ORDER APPROVING SAME IN
CASE NUMBER 89-O-12756-CWS \IN THE MATTER OF Sidne7 Franklin, Jr.
Attached is a copy of the Stipulation As To Facts and Disposition entered

into in the above-entitled matter pursuant to rules 405 and 406 of the
Rules of Procedure of the State Bar, and a copy of the Order Approving
Stipulation filed pursuant to rule 407 of said Rules.
Copies of rules 405-407, Rules of Procedure of the State Bar, rule 1400 of
Provisional Rules of Practice of the State Bar, and rules 951-952, 954-
955, California Rules of Court, are enclosed. Your attention is directed
to these rules, which set forth post-stipulation time limitations and
procedures, applicable to this proceeding before the State Bar Court.
DECLARATION OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, over the age of 18 years, whose business and place of
employment is 818 West Seventh Street, Suite 201, Los Angeles, California,
declare that I am not a party to the within action; that in the City and
County of Los Angeles, on the date shown below, I deposited true copies of
this Notice, the Stipulation As To Facts and Disposition, the Order
Approving Stipulation, and rules 405-407, Rules of Procedure of the State.
Bar, rule 1400 of Provisional Rules of Practice of the State Bar, and
rules 951-952, 954-955, California Rules of Court, in a sealed envelope
addressed as follows:
In a facility regularly maintained by the United States Postal

Service with first class mail postage thereon fully pre-paid
addressed to:
Harland William Braun, Esq. William D. Klibanow, Esq.

2049 Century Park East State Bar of California
#1800 333 South Beaudry Ave
Los Angeles, CA 90067 Ninth Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
I declare under penilty of perjury at Los Angeles, California, that the

foregoing is true and correct. Dated this 1--3, day of Marc_____~h, 1991.
State Bar Court
nassoas.hng kwiktag®
226 152 141
PUBUC MATTER
1
FILED"
2
STATE BAR COURT~’~
3 CLERK’S OFFICE
LOS ANGELES
4 THE STATE BAR COURT
5 OF THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA
6 HEARING DEPARTMENT - LOS ANGELES
In the Matter of ) CASE NO. 89-O-12756-CWS

8 SIDNEY FRANKLINs JR.s ) ORDER APPROVING ANDMODIFYING
No. 37135 ) FIRST AMENDED STIPULATION
9
) FILED FEBRUARY-14, 1991
A Member of the State Bar )
10
11
Theattached Stipulation as to facts and Discipline filed
12
February 14, 1991, (hereinafter "Stipulation") was submitted
13
pursuant to Rule 401 through 407 of the Transitional Rules of
14
Procedure of the State Bar of California (hereinafter "Rules of
15
Procedure") by the State Bar, through its Examiner, William D.
16
Klibanow, and Respondent, Sidney Franklin. The Stipulation has
17
been approved by the parties.
18
19 The court has examined the Stipulation and by this Order
2O modifies the same as follows:
21 i. On page 2, at line 22, the language "no previous
22 Stipulation in this matter has been submitted by the parties to
the State Bar Court" is changed to read "this is the first amended
,
Stipulation submitted by the parties to the State Bar Court".
~ ’ 24
25 2. It would appear that the parties inadvertently
26 inserted "Review Department" when referring to the "Supreme
27 Court". The reference to the "Review Department" should be
modified to read "The Supreme Court". On page 2, lines 19, 26,

1 page 6, line 21, page 9, lines 13, 14, 18, 21.
2 After reviewing the stipulated facts and conclusions of
3 law, I have determined that the Stipulation, as modified by this
4 Order, is fair as to facts and disposition and that the
5 disposition adequately protects the public interest. I find,
6 therefore, that there appears to be good cause for the approval of
7 the Stipulation as modified.
8 The Stipulation, as modified by this Order is binding on
9 the parties unless either party seeks to withdraw or modify it
10 pursuant to Rule 407(c) of the Rules of Procedure prior to action

11 by the Supreme Court.
12 XT XS THEREFO~ ORDERED that the Stipulation as to Facts
13 and Discipline filed February 14, 1991, in the matter of SIDNEY
14 FRAI~KLIN, JR., Case Number 89-0-12756 is~ROVED as MODIFIED. It
15 is recommended that Respondent be publicly reproved and that
16 Respondent be placed on probation for a period of two (2) years

17 subject to the conditions set forth in the Stipulation.
18 Finally, it is recommended that Respondent take and pass
19 the Professional Responsibility Examination given by the National
20 Committee of .Bar Examiners within one year from the date upon
21 which the disciplinary order of the Supreme Court becomes
22 effective and furnish satisfactory proof of such to the Probation
23 Department of the State Bar Court of the State Bar of California
24 within said year.
25 ///
26 ///
27 ///
28
-2-
1 Respondent is hereby notified that failure to comply with
2 the ordered conditions may constitute cause for a separate
3 proceeding for wilful breach of i-ii0, Rules of Professional
4 Conduct of the State Bar of California.
6
Christopher W. Smith
7 Judge of the State Bar Court
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-
PUBLIC MATTER
1 OFFICE OF TRIAL COUNSEL
STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA
2 WILLIAM KLIBANOW, No. 090860
Attorneys at Law
FILED
3 333 South Beaudry Avenue
Ninth Floor
4 Los Angeles, California 90017
(-;LERK’S OFFICE
5 (213) 580-5000 LOS ANGELES
8
THE STATE BAR COURT
9
OF THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA
10
HEARING DEPARTMENT - LOS ANGELES
11
12 In the Matter of ) CASE NO. 89-0-12756

)
13 ) FIRST AMENDED
) STIPULATION AS TO FACTS
14 SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR., No. 37135 ) AND DISCIPLINE PURSUANT
) TO RULES 405-407 OF THE
15 ) TRANSITIONAL RULES OF
) PROCEDURE OF THESTATE BAR
16 Members of the State Bar )
)
" 17
18 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the State Bar of
19 California, through its Examiner WILLIAM D. KLIBANOW, Re~nt,
20 SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR., hereinafter "Respondent," and HARLAND BRAUN,
21 Respondent’s counsel of record, in accordance with Rules 405
22 through 407 of the Transitional Rules of Procedure of the State
~3 Bar, as follows:
JURISDICTION:
The Respondent, SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR., was admitted to the

~6 practice of law in the State of California on June 14, 1965 and at
all times hereinafter mentioned was and is a member of the State
Bar of California.
1 II. THE FORMAL PROCEEDINGS INVOLVED:
2 A. A Notice to Show Cause to commence formal proceedings
3 was filed in the above-entitled matter on August 9, 1990 and was
4 served upon Respondent through his counsel, HARLAND BRAUN, by
5 certified mail, return receipt requested, on August 13, 1990.
6 On August 20, 1990, Respondent filed and served his Answer to the
7 Notice to Show Cause.
8 B. It is now the intention of the State Bar and Respondent
9 to dispose of this matter by Stipulation as to Facts and
10 Discipline in accordance with Rules 405 through 407 of the
11 Transitional Rules of Procedure of the State Bar.
12 III. WAIVERS AND UNDERSTANDING OF THE PARTIES
13 A. The parties stipulate that this matter may be determined
14 by a hearing judge, pursuant to Rule 407(a) of the Transitional
15 Rules of Procedure of the State Bar.
16 B. It is understood and acknowledged by the parties to this
17 Stipulation that:
18 i. Stipulations as to proposed discipline are not

19 binding upon the Review Department;
2O 2. This Stipulation as to Facts and Discipline is not
21 effective until approved by a hearing judge and may be disapproved
22 or rejected by the hearing judge; no previous Stipulation in this
23 matter has been submitted by the parties to the State Bar Court;
24 3. If approved by the hearing judge, its approving
25 order and the related record of State Bar proceedings shall be
26 filed with the Clerk of the Review Department;
27
4. Once adopted by the hearing judge, the Stipulation
28 shall bind the parties in the proceedings to which it relates
- 2 -
1 unless withdrawn or modified with approval of the judge, upon good
2 cause shown and upon application of a party made within fifteen
3 (15) days of service of the Order approving the Stipulation;
4 5. Pursuant to Rule 407(d) of the State Bar
5 Transitional Rules of~Procedure, if the hearing judge having
6 jurisdiction over this proceeding rejects this Stipulation as to
7 Facts and Discipline, the parties shall be relieved of all effects
8 of the Stipulation and the proceeding shall resume;
9 6. While the Respondent has been advised that there
10 are no other investigations and no other formal proceedings
11 pending concerning him at this time, Respondent also acknowledges
12 and stipulates that this Stipulation disposes only of those
13 disciplinary matters specifically addressed herein. If this
14 Stipulation is approved by the hearing’judge, the parties waive
15 further hearings only as to those matters specifically addressed
16 herein. By executing this document Respondent in no way waives his
17 rights to hearing on those matters which are not resolved by this
18 Stipulation.
19 7. Respondent has been notified of his obligation to
2O pay costs for this disciplinary proceeding as provided for in
21 Business and Professions Code Sections 6086.10 and 6140.7. The
22 amount of costs assessed will be set forth in cost certificates
23 submitted by the Office of Trial Counsel and State Bar Court upon
24 final review of the matter by the State Bar Court.
25 C. Pursuant to Rule 406 of the Transitional Rules of

26 Procedure of the State Bar of California, the Chief Trial Counsel
27 has delegated his authority to approve a Stipulation as to Facts
28 and Discipline in this matter to Examiner WILLIAM D. KLIBANOW.
- 3 -
1 D. The parties hereby waive any variance between the
2 violations alleged in the Notice to Show Cause in this matter and
3 the violations acknowledged in this Stipulation.
4 IV. ~TATEMENTS OF ACTS AND OMISSIONS WHICH ARE ADMITTED AND
5 ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE RESPONDENT AS CONSTITUTING CAUSE FOR
6 DISCIPLINE:
7 i. In or about December 1986, Respondent was hired by Victor
8 and Odila Benitez (hereinafter ’ithe Benitez’s") to represent them
9 in a personal injury matter on a contingency fee basis. In or
10 about October, 1987, Respondent caused a lawsuit to be filed on
ll behalf of the Benitez’s in the United States District Court,
12 bearing case number CV 87-6818-WPG.
13 2. Thereafter, Respondent failed to perform the services for
14 which he was hired by the Benitez’s in that he failed to timely
15 serve and prosecute the case against the appropriate Defendant
16 therein. Consequently, the case was dismissed by the court for
17 want of prosecution on July 27, 1988.
18 3. On November 30, 1988, Respondent notified the Benitez’s
19 that their case had been dismissed. On or about December 21,
2O 1988, Respondent met with the Benitez’s and paid them the sum of
21 $2,667.00 each in settlement of any claims they might have against
22 Respondent for malpractice.
23 4. The above settlement was unfair and unreasonable to the
24 Benitez’s in that it did not sufficiently recompense them for the
25 losses incurred due to Respondent’s malpractice. Respondent did
26 not fully disclose and transmit in writing to the Benitez’s the

27 terms of said settlement, and did not give the Benitez’s a
28
reasonable opportunity to seek the advice of independent counsel.
- 4 -
¯ .
1 Respondent failed to obtain the Benitez’s written consent to the
2 settlement.
3 5. Thereafter, the Benitez’s contacted the Respondent with
4 requests that he release their client file to them. Respondent
5 failed to respond to ~heir requests. The Benitez’s retained a new
6 counsel, who further requested their file. Respondent failed to
7 promptly deliver the file to the Benitez’s or to their subsequent
8 attorney even though requested to do so.
9 V. LEGAL CONCLUSIONS
10 i. In failing to perform the services for which he was
11 hired, Respondent wilfully violated former Rules of Professional
12 Conduct 6-101(A) (i) and 6-101(A) (2).

13 2. In entering into an agreement with the Benitez’s to
14 limit his liability to the Benitez’s for his personal malpractice,
15 Respondent wilfully violated former Rule of Professional
16 Conduct 6-102.
17 3. In entering into a business transaction with the
18 Benitez’s which was unfair and unreasonable to the Benitez’s, in

19 failing to fully disclose and transmit in writing to the Benitez’s
2O the terms of the transaction, in failing to give the Benitez’s a
21 reasonable opportunity to seek the advice of independent counsel
22 and in failing to obtain the Benitez’s written consent to the
23 business transaction, Respondent wilfully violated former Rule of
24 Professional Conduct 5-101.
25 4. In failing to communicate with the Benitez’s and in
26 failing to promptly deliver to the Benitez’s or their subsequent
27 counsel the papers and property to which they were entitled after
28 being requested to do so, Respondent wilfully violated California
- 5 -
1 Business and Professions Code section 6068(m) and former Rule of
2 Professional Conduct 2-III(A)(2).
3 VI. STATEMENT OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES:
4 A. Respondent has been candid and cooperative with the State
5 Bar during these disciplinary proceedings.
6 B. Respondent was admitted to the practice of law in the
7 State of California on June 14, 1965. He has no prior record of
8 discipline.
9 VII. STATEMENT OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES:
10 A. The misconduct acknowledged by Respondent caused harm to
11 his clients.
12 VIII. RECOMMENDED STIPULATED DISCIPLINE:
13 The Office of Trial Counsel of the State Bar and the
14~ Respondent stipulate that the afore-recommended discipline is
15 based upon the finding by the State Bar that protection of the
16 public and the interests of the attorney shall be served thereby.
17 It is hereby recommended that Respondent be publicly reproved
18 and that Respondent be placed on probation for a period of two (2)
19 years on the following terms and conditions:
20 A. The period of probation shall commence as of the
21 date on which the Order of the Review Department herein becomes
22 effective and shall continue for a period of two years.
23 B. During the period of probation, Respondent shall
24 comply with the provisions of the State Bar Act and Rules of
25 Professional Conduct of the State Bar of California.
26 C. Respondent shall, within thirty (30) days after
27 the effective date of this Stipulation, join the Law Practice
28
///
- 6 -
1 Management section of the State Bar of California and shall
2 pay whatever dues and costs are associated with said enrollment.
3 D. Respondent shall be referred to the Department of
4 Probation, State Bar Court, for assignment of a Probation Monitor.
5 Respondent shall promptly review the terms and conditions of
6 Respondent’s probation with the Probation Monitor to establish a
7 manner and schedule of compliance. During the period of
8 probation, Respondent shall furnish, in addition to the reports
9 set forth in Section VIII. E, F and G hereinafter, such reports
10 concerning Respondent’s compliance as may be requested by the
11 Probation Monitor. Respondent shall cooperate fully with the
12 Probation Monitor to enable him/her to discharge his/her duties
13 pursuant to Rule 611, Transitional Rules of Procedure of the
14 State Bar.
15 E. During the period of probation, Respondent shall
16 file written reports no later th~n January i0, April i0, July i0
17 and October i0 of each year or part thereof during which the
18 probation is in effect, with the Probation Department of the State
19 Bar Court, State Bar of California at Los Angeles. Each report
20 shall state that it covers the preceding calendar quarter or
21 applicable portion thereof, and shall be certified by affidavit or
22 executed under penalty of perjury. If the effective date of
23 probation iso~less than thirty (30) days preceding any of the
24 reporting dates indicated above, Respondent shall file
25 Respondent’s first report on the second reporting date following
26 the effective date of probation.
27 i. In Respondent’s first and in each subsequent

28 report, Respondent shall certify that he has read and complied
- 7 -
1 with all provisions of the State Bar Act and Rules of Professional
2 Conduct during said period and that he has complied with all
3 conditions of probation stated herein during said period.
4 2. Respondent’s final report shall be filed
5 covering the remaining portion of probation following the last
6 report required by the foregoing provisions of VIII. E, F,
7 and G above.
8 F. Respondent shall, within thirty (30) days after the
9 effective date of this Stipulation, meet with his Probation
10 Monitor to commence the development and promulgation of an office
11 procedure manual. The manual shall address issues related to law
12 office management, case load management, trust account management,
13 employee supervision, and any other appropriate issues, according
14 to the discretion of the Probation Monitor. Thereafter,
15 Respondent.shall develop and promulgate an office procedure manual

16 for use in his law practice within ninety (90) days after the
17 effective date of this Stipulation. Respondent shall provide a

18 copy of said manual to his Probation Monitor and shall certify to
19 his Probation Monitor in each quarterly report that said manual is
20 in use in his office.
21 G. Respondent shall, with each quarterly report he is
22 required to furnish pursuant to the terms of this stipulation,
23 report, in writing, to his Probation Monitor, the method by which
24 any procedures identified in the manual have been implemented by
25 Respondent and the results of said implementation.
26
H. During the period of probation, Respondent shall
27
maintain at the Los Angeles office of the State Bar Court, his
28
current office or other address for State Bar membership purposes
- 8 -
1 as well as his current residence address. Within ten days of any
2 change of any of the aforementioned addresses, Respondent shall
3 notify the Los Angeles Office of the State Bar Court of said
4 changes in writing.
5 I. Except,to the extent prohibited by the attorney-
6 client privilege and the privilege against self-incrimination,
7 Respondent shall answer fully, promptly and truthfully all
8 inquiries directed to him personally or in writing by the State
9 Bar Office of Trial Counsel or by the Presiding Judge of the State
10 Bar Court or his/her designee.
11 J. Respondent shall enroll in State Bar Ethics School
12 and successfully complete said program within one year from the
13 date upon which the order of the Review Department herein becomes
14 effective and furnish satisfactory evidence to the Review
15 Department of the State Bar Court of successful completion of
16 said course.
17 Further, pursuant to Stipulation it is recommended that the
18 Review Department order that Respondent take and pass the
19 Professional Responsibility Examination given by the National
2O Committee of Bar Examiners within one year from the date upon
21 which the order of the Review Department herein becomes effective
22 and furnish satisfactory evidence to the Probation Department of
23 the State Bar court of successful completion of the examination.
24 ///
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
///
- 9 -
1 Respondent is hereby notified that failure to comply with the
2 above conditions may constitute cause for a separate proceeding
3 f~r willful breach of Rule i-ii0, Rules of Professional Conduct of
4 the State Bar of California.
5

7
8
9 Date: "~/I ~ , 1991
WILLIAM. K~L~ANOW
10
11
12
~I~NEY FRANKLIN, JR
13 Respondent
14
15 Date: ~ ~___, 1991
16 Attorney for Respondent

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- i0 -
~,
BELOW FOR FILING STAMP ONLY)
I HARLAND W. BRAUN
PROFESSIONAl. CORPORATION
2
ATTORNEY AT LAW
TWO CENTURY PLAZA. SUITE ISOO
2049 CENTURY PARK EAIT
FILED
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90067
3 (213) 277-4777
AUg 2 S
4 State Bar No. 41842 STATE BAR COUR
CLERK’S OFFICE
Attorney for Sidney Franklin, Jr. LOS ANGELES
6

I0 HEARING DEPARTMENT - LOS ANGELES
II
12 In the Matter of ) Case No. 89-0-12756

13 )
SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR., NO. 37135 ) ANSWER
14 )
A Member of the State Bar )
15 )
16
17 Respondent, Sidney Franklin, Jr., through his attorney,

18 Harland W. Braun, hereby denies all the allegations in the
19 Notice to Show Cause filed August 9, 1990.
20
21
22 Dated:
23 Attorney for Respondent
SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR.
24
25
26
27
28
VERIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF
I have read the foregoing
and know its contents.
I~1 CHECK APPLICABLE PARAGRAPH
~] I am a party to this action. The matters stated in the foregoing document are true of my own knowledge except as to
those matters which are stated on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true.
["] I am [] an Officer [] a partner [] a of
a party to this action, and am authorized to make this verification for and on its behalf, and I make this verification for that
reason. I-I I am informed and believe and on that ground allege that the matters stated in ~e foregoing document are
true. [] The matters stated in the foregoing document are true of my own knowledge except as to thos~ matters which are
stated on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true.
I am one of the attorneys for ,
a party to this action. Such party is absent from the county of aforesaid wh~re such attorn~s have their office, and [make
this verification for and on behalf of that party for that reason. I am informed and believe and,on that ground allege that
the matters stated in the foregoing document are true.
Executed on , 19-----, at California.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Type or Print Name Signature

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF DOCUMENT
(other than summons and complaint)
Received copy of document described as
on 19~.
Type or Print Name Signature

PROOF OF SERVICE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF

I am employed in the county of Los Angeles , State of California.
I am over the.age qf 18 and.not a pLrtv tq the within action: my business address i~"
2049 ~entury eark ~&sz, Suite 1800, Los Angeles, CA 90067
On 8/2]_ 1990, I served the foregoing document described as
ANSWER
on
in this action by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed as follows:
Richard E. Roylance
Office of Trial Counsel
State Bar of California
333 South Beaudry Ave.
:~ (BY MAIL) I caused such envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid to be placed in the United States mail
at Los gncreles. California.
Executed on Ai~u.qt 21 : 19-9_-0--, at . T,c~_~ ~,n~oq o~ , California.
[-"1 (BY PERSONAL SERVICE) I caused such envelope to be delivered by hand to the offices of the addressee.
Executed on , 19~_0__, at LOS Anqeles , California.
)~ (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct.
[~ (Federal) I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service was
made.
JANUARY KING
Type or Print Name
@~.
STUART’S EXBROOK TIMESAVER I~E’VISED 6183)
UBLlC MATTER
FILED
STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA AUG 0 9
2 REBECCA MEYER ROSENBERG, NO. 125790
Attorney at Law
STATE ,B, AR COURT
3 333 South Beaudry Avenue CLERK 8 OFFICE
Ninth Floor LOS ANGELES
4 Los Angeles, California 90017
5 (213) 580-5000
11

)
13 SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR., NO. 37135 ) NOTICE TO SHOW CAUSE
)
14 A Member of the State Bar )
)
15
16 TO: SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR., Respondent herein:
17 IF YOU FAIL TO FILE AN ANSWER TO THIS NOTICE WITHIN THE

TIME ALLOWED BY STATE BAR RULES0 INCLUDING EXTENSIONS, YOU MAY
18 BE ENROLLED AS AN INVOLUNTARY INACTIVE MEMBER OF THE STATE BAR
AND WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO PRACTICE LAW UNTIL AN ANSWER IS
19 FILED.
20 You were admitted to the practice of law in the State of
21 California on June 14, 1965. Pursuant to rule 501, Rules of

22 Procedure of the State Bar of California, reasonable cause has
23 been found to conduct a formal disciplinary hearing, commencing
24 at a time and place to be fixed by the State Bar Court (NOTICE
25 OF TIME AND PLACE OF HEARING WILL BE MAILED TO YOU BY THE STATE

26 BAR COURT CLERK’S OFFICE), by reason of the following:
27
///
28
///
¯ *¯
o.
~
1 COUNT ONE
2 I. In or about December 1986, you were employed
3 by Victor and Odila Benitez (hereinafter "the
4 Benitezs") to represent them in a personal injury
5 matter on a contfngency fee basis.
6 2. In or about October 1987, you filed a
7 lawsuit on behalf of the Benitezs in United States
8 District Court.
9 3. Thereafter, you failed to perform the
10 services for which you were employed, resulting in the
11 dismissal of the Benitezs’ claim.
12 4. In or about December 1988, you entered into
13 an unfair and unreasonable business transaction with
14 the Benitezs. The terms of said business transaction
15 were not fully disclosed and transmitted in writing to
16 the Benitezs. You failed to give the Benitezs a
17 reasonable opportunity to seek the advice of
18 independent counsel. You failed to obtain the
19 Benitezs’ written consent to the business transaction.
20 5. You failed to communicate with the Benitezs,
21 despite their attempts to contact you. You failed to
22 deliver to the Benitezs all papers and property to
23 which they were entitled. You misrepresented to the
24 Benitezs’ subsequent attorney that you no longer had

25 possession of their file.
26 ///
27
///
28
///
- 2 -
1 You committed the above-described acts in wilful violation
2 of your oath and duties as an attorney under disciplinary case
3 law and/or California Business and Professions Code sections
4 6068(a), 6068(m), 6103 and 6106 and of former Rules of
5 Professional Conduct 2~III(A) (2), 5-101 and 6-I01(A)(2).
7 ~ WXTHXN ~WENTY (20) DAYS after service of this Notice to
8 Show Cause, you shall file a written answer as provided in rule
9 552, Rules of Procedure of the State Bar of California.
10 NOTICE - DEFAULT PROCEDURE!
11 YOUR DEFAULT MAY BE ENTERED FOR FAILURE TO FILE A

WRITTEN ANSWER TO THIS NOTICE WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS
12 AFTER SERVICE AS PRESCRIBED BY RULE 552, TRANSITIONAL
RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE STATE BAR. SHOULD YOU TIMELY
13 FILE AN ANSWER, YOUR DEFAULT MAY ALSO BE ENTERED FOR
FAILURE TO APPEAR AT THE FORMAL HEARING. THE ENTRY OF
14 YOURDEFAULTMAY RESULT IN THE CHARGES SET FORTH IN THIS
NOTICE TO SHOW CAUSE BEING ADMITTED AND DISCIPLINE
15 RECOMMENDED OR IMPOSED BASED ON THOSE ADMITTED CHARGES.
IF YOUR DEFAULT IS ENTERED, YOU WILL LOSE THE
16 OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE FURTHER IN THESE PROCEEDINGS
UNLESS AND UNTIL YOUR DEFAULT IS SET ASIDE ON MOTION
17 TIMELY MADE UNDER THE PRESCRIBED GROUNDS. SEE RULE
552.1 ET SEQ., TRANSITIONAL RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE
18 STATE BAR.
19
NOTICE - INACTIVE ENROLLMENT!
2O
YOU ARE HEREBY FURTHER NOTIFIED THAT IF THE STATE BAR
21 COURT FINDS, PURSUANT TO BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE
SECTION 6007(c), THAT YOUR CONDUCT POSES A SUBSTANTIAL
22 THREAT OF HARM TO THE INTERESTS OF YOUR CLIENTS OR TO
THE PUBLIC, THAT YOUMAY BE INVOLUNTARILY ENROLLED ASAN
23 INACTIVE MEMBER OF THE STATE BAR. YOUR INACTIVE
ENROLLMENT WOULD BE IN ADDITION TO ANY DISCIPLINE
24 RECOMMENDED BY THE COURT. SEE RULES 550 AND 560,
TRANSITIONAL RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE STATE BAR.
25
///
26
27
///
28 ///
-3-
1 NOTICE - COST ASSESSMENT!
2 IN THE EVENT THESE PROCEDURES RESULT IN PUBLIC

DISCIPLINE, YOU MAY BE SUBJECT TO THE PAYMENT OF COSTS
3 INCURRED BY THE STATE BAR IN THE INVESTIGATION, HEARING
AND REVIEW OF THIS MATTER PURSUANT TO BUSINESS AND
4 PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 6086.10. SEE RULE 460 ET SEQ.,
TRANSITIONAL RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE STATE BAR.
5
OFFICE OF TRIAL COUNSEL
6 THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA
9 DATE:~, 1990 Ass’s~ant Chief Tri~l Counsel
10
11
12
13
14~
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 4 -
2 REBECCA MEYER ROSENBERG, No. 125790
Attorney at Law
FILED
333 South Beaudry Avenue, 9th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90017 AUG ! 3 1990
4 STATE BAR COUR~
(213) 580-5000 CLERKS OFFICE
5 LOS ANGELES
10
11 In the Matter of ) Case No. 89 O 12756

)
12 SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR., NO. 37135 ) DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY
) MAIL OF NOTICE TO SHOW
13 A Member of the State Bar ) CAUSE
)
14
15 I, the undersigned, declare that I am over the age of 18
16 years and not a party to the within action; that my business
17 address and place of employment is:
18 [X] 333 South Beaudry Avenue, Los Angeles, CA;
19 [ ] 555 Franklin Street, San Francisco, CA;

2O that on August 13, 1990, I served a true copy of the. Notice to
21 Show Cause herein by certified mail, return receipt requested, in
22 a sealed envelope, postage fully prepaid, depositing same in a
23 facility regularly maintained by the United States Postal Service,

24 addressed to the member at the latest address shown on the
25 official membership records of the State Bar of California, as
26 follows:
27 In a sealed envelope by certified mail, with a return
28 receipt requested, to the member or former member at the
1 latest address shown on the official membership records of
2 the State Bar.
4 and addressed to:
5 HARLAND WILLIAM BRAUN

2049 Century Park E #1800
6 Los Angeles, CA 90067
7 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true
8 and correct and that this declaration was executed at
9 [X] Los Angeles
10 [ ] San Francisco
ll on the date shown below.
12
13
14
15
STEPHANIE A. GARCIA
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 2 -
(State Bar Court Case No. 00-O-11566)
SUPREIViE. COURT
S107295
FILED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA
EN BANC Frederick K. Ohirich Clerk

DEPUTY ....................
IN RE SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR., ON DISCIPLINE
It is ordered that SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR., State Bar No. 37135, be

suspended from the practice of law for six months, that execution of the suspension
be stayed, and that he be placed on probation for one year subject to the conditions of
probation recommended by the Hearing Department of the State Bar Court in its
order approving stipulation filed on January 16, 2002, as modified by its order filed
February 27, 2002. It is further ordered that he take and pass the Multistate
Professional Responsibility Examination within one year after the effective date of
this order. (See Segretti v. State Bar (1976) 15 Cal.3d 878, 891, fn. 8.) Costs are
awarded to the State Bar and one-half of said costs shall be added to and become part
or’the membership fees for the years 2003 and 2004. (Business & Professions Code
section 6086.10.)
kwikt=g® 225 162 140

1
2 ST_AT_E BAR couRT

~T’iERK,S OFFICE
3 ~"~ ANGELES

8 In the Matter of Case No. 00-0-11566

9 SIDNEY F~KLIN, JR.,
10 Member No. 37135, MODIFICATION ORDER

11 A Member of the State Bar.
12
13
TO ALL PARTIES AND COUNSEL IN THE ABOVE ENTITLED MATTER:
14
On the Court’s own motion, the pai-ties’ stipulation and order approving same filed on
15
January 16, 2002, are amended to recommend payment of disciplinary costs be paid in equal
16
amounts prior to February 1 for the years 2003 and 2004 because the Supreme Court’s order in this
17
matter will not be effective until after February 1, 2002. Accordingly, the year "2002" on page 1 of
18
the stipulation shall be deleted and "2004" shall be inserted.
19
The parties have 15 days from the date of service of this order to file any objections thereto.
20
If no objections are timely filed, the Clerk of the State Bar Court is ordered to transmit the record
21
to the California Supreme Court.
22
23
24
25 Dated: February ~/, 2002
26
27
28
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
[Rule 62(b), Rules Proc.; Code Civ. Proc,, § 1013a(4)]
I am a Case Administrator of the State Bar Court. I am over the age of eighteen and not a party to
the within proceeding. Pursuant to standard court practice, in the City and County of Los Angeles,
on February 27, 2002, I deposited a true copy of the following document(s):
MODIFICATION ORDER, filed.February 27, 2002
in a sealed envelope for collection and mailing on that date as follows:
IX] by first,class mail, with postage thereon fully prepaid, through the United States POstal
Service at Los Angeles, California, addressed as follows:
SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR. ESQ.

4727 WILSHIRE BLVD #101
LOS ANGELES CA 90010
IX] by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California
BARRY THORPE, ESQ., Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, California, on
February 27, 2002.
Rose M. Luthi
Case Administrator
State Bar Court
Certificate of Service.wpt
Bar Court of the State Bar of
Hearing ~i~rtment [] Los Angeles [] ~ Francisco
Counselforthe ~ate ~r Case number(s]

THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA 00-0-11566
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF TRIAL
COUNSEL
BARRY G. THORPE, NO. 126422 JAN t G OOZ
1149 SOUTH HILL STREET
LOS ANGELES, CA 90015 STATE BAR COURT
CLERK’S OFFICE
LOS ANGELF_S
CounselforRespondent
SIDNEY FRANKLIN, Jr. 37135
4727 WILSHIRE BLVD., #i01
LOS ANGELES, CA 90010
Submitted to [] assigned judge RI settlement judge

In the Matter of
STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION
SIDNEY FRANKLIN, ~R. ¯ AND ORDER APPROVING
Bar# 37135 STAYED SUSPENSION; NO ACTUAL SUSPENSION

A Member of the State Bar of Callfomla [] PREVIOUS STIPULATION REJECTED
[Respondent]
Ao Parties’ Acknowledgments:
[I] Respondent is a member of the State Bar of California, admitted June 14, 19 6 5
(date)
[2]The parties agree to be bound by the factual stipulations contained herein even if conclusions of law or
disposition are rejected or changed by the Supreme Coud.
(3) All investigations or proceedings listed by case number in the caption of this stipuloticn are entirely
resolved by this stipulation, and are deemed consolidated. Dismissed charge(s)/count(s) are listed under
"Dismissals." The stipulation and order consist of /O pages.
(4] A statement of acts or omissions acknowledged by Respondent as cause or causes for discipline is
included under "Facts."
(5] Conclusions of law, drawn from and specifically referring to the facts are also included under "Conclusions
of Law." -
(6]No more than 30 days .prior to the tiling of this stipulation, Respondent has been advised in writing of any
pending investigation/proceeding not resolved by this stipulation, except for criminal investigations.
(7) Payment of Disciplinary Costs--Respondent acknowledges the provisions of Bus. & Prof. Code §§6086.1 0 &
6140.7. [Check one option only]:
[] costs added to membership fee for calendar year following effective date of discipline ....
[] costs to be paid in equal amounts prior to February I for the following membership years:
2002 , 2003 ....
(hardship, special circumstances or other good cause per rule 284, Rules of Procedure]
[] costs waived in part as set forth under "~rtial Waiver of Costs"
[] costs entirely waived ~,
Note: All information required by this form and any additional information which cannot be provided in the space provided, shall be set forth in the
text component of this stipulation under specific headings, i.e. "Facts," "Dismissals;’ "Conclusions of Law."
{Stipulation form approved by SBC Executive Commltee 10116100) 5toyed Suspension
I
B." AggraVating CircumstancesL.v--efinition, see Standards for Attorney S~ctions for Professional Misconduct,
standard 1.2[b].] Facts supporting aggravating circumstances are required, -
[I] I~ Prior record of discipline [see standard 1,2[t]]
.[a] [] State Bar Court case # of prior case 89-0-12756
[b] i~l date prior discipline effective May’ 15, 1991
(c] I~ Rules of Professional Conduct/State Bar Act violations: Former Rules of Professional
Conduct Sections 6=I01(A)(i) and 6-101(A)(2) [Both sections now
qoverned by rule 3-110(A)]
[d] degree of prior discipline Public reprov~l
[] If Respondent has two or more incidents of prior discipline, use space provlded below or
under "Prior Discipline".
Dishonesty: Respondent’s misconduct ~was surrounded by or followed by bad faith, dishonesty,

concealment, overreaching or other violation~ of the State Bar Act or Rules of Professional
Conduct.
[3] [] Trust Violation: Trust funds or property were involved and Respondent refused or was unable to
account to the client or person who was the object of the misconduct for improper conduct toward
said funds or property.
(4) [] Harm: Respondent’s misconduct harmed significantly a client, the public or the administration of
justice.
(5] [] Indifference: Respondent demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the
consequences of his or her misconduct.
[6) 0: Lack of Cooperatlon: l~spondent displayed a lack of candor and cooperation to victims of his/her
misconduct or to the State Bar during disciplinary investigation or proceedings.
(7) [] Multiple/Pattern of Misconduct: Respondent’s current misconduct evidences multiple acts of ~yrong-
doing or demonstrates a pattern of misconduct.
[8] 0 No aggravating circumstances are involved.
Additional aggravating circumstances:
(Stipulation form approved by SBC Executive Commltee I0116/00] Stayed Suspension

2
C, Mitigating’Circ.umstances [se~ ~ndard 1.2[e].] Facts supporting mitlg’ ..~g circumstances are required.
[I ] O No Prior Discipline: Respondent has no prior record of discipline over many years of practice coupled
with present miscor~duct which is not deemed serious.
[2] ~} No Harm: Respondent did nol harm lhe client or person who was the object of the misconduct.
[3] ~] Candor/Cooperation: Respondent displayed spontaneous candor and cooperation to the victims of
his/her misconduct and to lhe State Bar during disciplinary investigation and proceedings.
[4] [] Remorse: Respondent promptly took objective steps spontaneously demonstrating remorse and
recognition of the wrongdoing, which steps were designed to timely atone tor any consequences of his/
her misconduct.
(5) [] Restitution: Respondent paid $ on in restitution

to without lhe threat or force of disciplinary, civil or criminal proceed-
ings.
[6] [] Delay: These disciplinary proceedings were excessively delayed. The delay is not attributable to
Respondent and the delay prejudiced him/her. °
[7] [] Good Faith: Respondent acted in good faith.
{8] [] Emotional/Physical Difficulties: At the time ot the stipulated act or acts of professional misconduct
Respondent suffered extreme emotional difficulties or physical disabilities which expert testimony would
establish was directly responsible for the misconduct. The difficulties or disabilities were not the product of
any illegal conduct by the member, such as illegal drug or substance abuse, and Respondent no longer
suffers from such difficulties or disabilities,
[9] [] Family Problems: AJ the time of the misconduct, Respondent suffered extreme difficulties in his/her
personal life which were other than emotional or physical in nature.
[I 0] [] Severe Financial Stress: At the time of the misconduct, Respondent suffered from severe financial stress
which resulted from circumstances not reasonably foreseeable or which were beyond his/her control and
which were directly responsible for the misconduct.
[I I] [] Good Character: Respondent’s good character is at1ested to by a wide range of references in the
legal and general communities who are aware of the full extent of his/her misconduct.
[I 2) [] Rehabilitation: Con.siderable time has passed since the acts of professional misconduct occurred
followed by convincing proof of subsequent rehabilitation.
(13) [] No mitigating circumstances are involved.
Additional mitigating circumstances:
(Stipulation form approved by SBC Executive Commitee 10/16/O0) Stoyecl Suspension

3
D. Discipline
I.’ Stayed Suspension.
A0 Respondent shall be suspended from the practice of law for a period of s i x {6~ mo~nths
[] i. and until Respondent shows proof satisfactory to the State Bar Court of rehabilitation and
present fitness to practice and present learning and ability in the law pursuant to
slandard 1.4(c][ii], Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct
[] ii. and until Respondent pays restitution to

{payee{s]] [or the Client Security Fund, if appropriate], in the amount of
, plus 10% per annum accruing from
and provides proof thereof to the. Probation Unit, Office of the Chief Trial Counsel
[] iii. and until Respondent does the following:
B. The above-referenced suspension shall be stayed.
2. Probation.
Respondent shall be placed on probation for a period of 14 year

which shall commence upon the effective date of the Supreme Court order herein. [See rule 953,
California Rules of Court.]
E. Additional Conditions of Probation:
[I] ~ During the probation period, Respondent shall comply with the provisions of the State Bar Act
and Rules of Professional Conduct.
c2) Within ten [I0) days of any. change, Respondent shall report to the Membership Records Office
of the State Bar and to the Probation Unit, all changes of information, including current office
address and telephone number, or other address for State Bar purposes, as prescribed by
section 6002.1 of the Business and Professions Code.
[3] I~ Respondent shall submit written quarterly reports to the Probation Unit on each January I0, April
I0, July 10, and October 10 of the period of probation. Under penalty of perjury, respondent
shall state whether respondent has complied with the State Bar Act, the Rules of Professional
Conduct, and all conditions of probation during the preceding calendar quarter.lf the first
report would cover less than 30 days, that report shall be submitled on the next quarter date,
and cover the extended period.
In addition to all quarterly reports, a tinal report, containing the same information, is due no
earlier than twenty [20} days before the last day of the period of probation and no later than
the last day of pro~(~tion. ’
[4) [] Respondent shall be assigned a probation monitor. Respondent shall promptly review the. terms
and conditions of probation with the probation monitor to establish a manner and schedule of
compliance. During the period of probation, respondent shall furnish to the monitor such reports
as may be requested, in addition to the quarterly reports required to be submitted to lhe Proba-
tion Unit. Respondent shall cooperale fully with the probation monitor.
[5] m Subject to assertion of applicable privileges, Respondent shall answer fully, promptly and
truthfully any inquiries of the Probation Unit of the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel and any
probation monitor assigned under these conditions which are directed to Respondent
personally or in writing relating to whether Respondent is complying or has complied with the
probation conditions.
{Stipulation form approved by SBC Executive Commitee 10/16/00] Stayed Suspension
4
.Within one [I] yec :!~lhe effective date of the d~sc~pl~ne I’, .. in, respondent shall provide Io the
Probation Unit satis~..:~.~ory proof of attendance at a session ~,1the Ethics School, and Passage of
the test given at the end of that session.
[] No Ethics School recommended,
(7} Respondent shall comply with all conditions of probation imposed in the underlying criminal
matter and shall so declare under penalty of perjury in conjunction with any quarterly report to
be filed with the Probation Unit.
[] The following conditions are attached hereto and incorporated:
[] Substance Abuse Conditions [] Law Office Managemenl Conditions
[] Medical Conditions Financial Conditions
[] Other conditions negotiated by the parties:
Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination: Respondent shall provide proof of passage of the.
Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination ("MPRE"), administered by the National Conference of
Bar Examiners, to the Probation Unit of the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel within one year. Failure to pass
the MPRE results in actual suspension without further hearing until passage. But see rule 951(b), California
Rules of Court, and rule 321(a)(1) & (c), Rules of Procedure.
[] No MPRE recommended.
(Stipulatlon form approved by SBC Executive Commltee 10/I 6/00} Stayed Suspenslon
5
the Matter of
I~ ~ Case Number(s):
00-0-11566
Member of the State Bar
Financial Conditions
Respondent shall pay restitution to (payee(s)) (or the

Client Security Fund, if appropriate}, in the amount(s} of ¯ plus
10% interest per annum accruing from , and
provide proof thereof to the Probation Unit, Office of the Chief Trial Counsel,
{3 no later than
on the payment schedule set forth on the attachment under "Financial Conditions,
Restitution."
If respondent possesses client funds at any time during the period covered by a required quarterly
report, respondent shall file with each required report a certificate from respondent and/or a
certified public accountant or other financial profesdonal approved by the Probation Unit, certifying
that:
respondent has maintained a bank account in a bank authorized to do business in the State
of California, at a branch located within the State of CalIfornia, and that such account is
designated as a "Trust Account" or "Clients’ Funds Account",
respondent has kept and maintained the following:

i. a written ledger for each client on whose behalf funds are held that sets forth:
1. the name of such client;
2. the date, amount and source of all funds received on behalf of such client;
3. the date, amount, payee and purpose of each disbursement made on behalf of
such client; and,
4. the current balance for such cliedt.
ii. a written journal for each client trust fund account that sets forth:
1. the name of such account;
2. the date, amount and client affected by each debit and credit; and,
3 the current balance in such account.
iii. all bank statements and cancelled check3 for each client trust account; and,
iv. each monthly reconciliation (balancing} of (i}, {ii), and (iii}, above, and if there are any
differences between the monthly total balances reflected in {i}, {ii}, and (iii), above, the
reasons for the differences.
c. respondent has maintained a written journal of securities or other properties held for clients
that specifies:
!. each item of security and property held;
ii. the person on whose behalf the security or properly is held;
¯ iii. the date, of receipt of the security or properly;
~ iv. th~ date of distribution of the security or property; and,
v. the person to whom the secudJy or property was distributed.
If respondent does not possess any client funds, properly or securities during the entire period
covered by a report, respondent must so state under penalty of perjury in the report filed with
the Probation Unit for that reporting period. In this circumstance, respondent need not file
the accountant’s certificate described above.
3. The requirements of this condition are in addition to those set forth in rule 4-] 00, Rules of Profes-
sional Conduct.
c. ~ Wffhin one (I) year of the effective date of the discipline herein, respondent shall supply to the Proba-
tion Unit satisfactory proof of attendance at a sesdon of the Ethics School Client Trust Accounting
School, within the same period of time, and passage of the test given at the end of that session.
(Financial Conditions form approved by SBC Executive Committee 10/16/00)
page#
ATTACHMENT TO
IN THE MATTER OF: SIDNEY FRANKLIN
CASE NUMBER(S): 00-O- 11566
FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
Facts
COU. NT ONE:
1. During the period of between October 1999 and March 2000, Respondent
maintained a client trust account at City National Bank. This account was
numbered 0001136658. For fifteen (15) years prior to this period of time,
Respondent was a partner in a law firm. While a member of this law firm,
Respondent delegated the accounting and management of his trust account to an
employee. Commencing in October, 1999, Respondent’s law firm dissolved and
Respondent commenced to operate a new law firm at a different location.
Respondent now fully assumed control over his client trust account but without
the aid of any effec-tive accounting system that would allow him to accurately
balance or monitor his client trust account.
2. On and between November 2, 1999 and February 1, 2000, Respondent

deposited his own personal funds into his client trust account. These deposits are
as follows:
Date Amount CheckNu,-rloe," - ’- -

11,2-99 $1,000.00 Check #2013
11-2-99 $750.00 Check #1305
11-2-99 $2,000.00 Check #2956
11-2-99 $1,000.00 Check # 1776
3. On and between January 29, 2000 and February 1, 2000, Respondent

issued checks from his client trust account to pay for his own personal expenses.
Page #~-
Attachment Page 1
These issued checks were as follows:
Date Amount Check Number

1-29-00 $1,012.28 Check #1926
1-29-00 $1,010.44 Check #1925
2-1-00 $820.00 Check # 1930
Legal Conclusions:
4. By depositing and commingling personal funds belonging to Respondent,

into his attorney client trust account, Respondent willfully violated Rules of
Professional Conduct, rule 4-100IA).
COUNT TWO:
5. On and between October 23, 1998 and April 8, 2000, Respondent was
employed to represent Erasmo Abellana ("Abellana’)in a personal injury matter.
Pursuant to this matter, Abellana was treated for his injuries on a lien basis
from the Tower Roxsan clinic and Diagnostic Imaging Group. The amount of these
medical liens totaled $1,500.00.
6. In or about June, 1999, Abellana’s injurymatter settled. On June 21, 1999,

Respondent deposited the settlement proceeds in the amount of $15,000.00 into
his client trust account. Respondent thereafter promptly disbursed the
settlement proceeds with the exception of $1,500.00 in monies that were to have
been used to pay Abellana’s medical liens. Respondent initially did not pay the
medical liens so that they could be negotiated, however, Abellana’s file was
inadvertently closed without resolution of the liens. After being contacted by
Abellana regarding the status of her matter, Respondent resolved and paid the
outstanding liens on April .8, 2000.
Page #y
Attachment Page 2
7. Pending final resolution on the medical liens, Respondent was required to
maintain at least $1,500.00 in his client trust account between June 21, 1999
and April 8, 2000. However, on two occasions, the balance in Respondent’s client
trust account dipped below $I,500.00 as follows:
Date Amount of Dip

11-1-99 $355.55
11-9~99 $378.88
8. These dips occurred shortly after the time Respondent assumed control
over his client trust account. Respondent promptly deposited his own funds to
cover the deficit in his client trust account.
Legal Conclusions:
9. By not maintaining at least $1,500.00 in his client trust account to pay the
medical liens in Abellana’s matter, Respondent failed to maintain the balance of
funds held for the benefit of a client. Respondent thus willfully violated Rules of
Professional Conduct, rule 4-100(A)
PENDING PROCEEDINGS.
The disclosure date referred to, on page one, paragraph A.(6), was November 19,
2001.
AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.
Standards for Attorney Sanctions 1.7(a) [Prior discipline]
Standards for Attorney Samctions ,...2{bj [Ch~n~ t, u~L account offenses]
Waysman v. State Bar of California, (1986) 41 Cal.3d 452.
Palomo v. State Bar of California, (1984) 36 Cal.3d 785.
Page # ~
Attachment Page 3
Date Respondent’s Counsel’s signature print name
Del:~ly,~ilal~.~Jnsel ~I’ slg n a ture print name
ORDER
Finding the stipulation to be fair to the parties and that it adequately protects the public,
IT IS ORDERED that the requested dismissal of counts/charges, if any, is GRANTED, without
prejudice, and:
The stipulatedfacts and disposition are APPROVED and the DISCIPLINE RECOMMENDED
to the Supreme Court.
The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED AS MODIFIED as set forth below,
and the DISCIPLINE IS RECOMMENDED to the Supreme Court.
The parties are bound, by the stipulation as approved unless: I ) a motion to withdraw or
modify the stipulation, filed within 15 days after service of this order, is granted; or 2] this
court modifies or further modifies the approved stipulation. [See rule 135(b], Rules of
Procedure.) The effective date of this disposition is the effective date of the Supreme
Court order herein, normally 30 days after file date. (See rule 953(a], California Rules of
Court.]
Date the State Bar Court
(Stipulation form approved by SBC Executive Committee I0122/97] Suspension~robation Violation Signature Page
page
[Rule 62(b), Rules Proc.; Code Civ. Proc., § 1013a(4)]
I am a Case Administrator of the State Bar Court. I am over the age of eighteen and not a party to
the within proceeding. Pursuantto standard court practice, in the City and County of Los Angeles,
on January 16, 2002, I deposited a true copy of the following document(s):

AND ORDER APPROVING STAY SUSPENSION, filed January 16, 2002
ix] by first-class mail, with postage thereon fully prepaid, through the United States Postal

4727 WILSHIRE BLVD. #101
ix] by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California
BARRY THORPE, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, California, on
January 16, 2002.
Tammy R. Cleaver
Case Administrator
State Bar Court
Certificate of Service.wpt
022 605 097
Do not write above this line.]
State Bar Court of California

Hearing Department [] Los Angeles [] San Francisco
Coumel~r~eSt~eBar Case number[s] (for Court’s use)

SHARI SVENINGSON
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF
TRIAL COUNSEL
0~0-16067
PI JBLIC MATTEF
1149 S. Hill Street
(213) 765-1000
Bar#195298
FILED
~ Cou~elf~spond~t
MAY 11)ZO05
[] InPro~Resp~d~t STATE BAR COURT
OFFICE
SUSAN MARGOLIS LOSANGELES
Margolis & Margolis
2000 Riverside Drive
Los Anqeles. CA 90039
.(3.23) 953-8996
~r~ 104629
Submiffed to [] assigned judge [] sefflement Judge
IntheMaflerof
SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR. STIPULATIONRE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING
Bar# 37135
A Member of the State Bar of California
STAYED SUSPENSION; NO ACTUAL SUSPENSION
(Respondent) PREVIOUS STIPULATION REJECTED
O
Note: All information required by this form and any additional information which cannot be provided in
the space provided, must be set forth in an attachment to this stipulation under specific headings, e.g.,
"Facts,, "Dismissals," "Conclusions of Law" "Supporting Authority," etc.
A. Parties’ Acknowledgments:
[I] Respondent is a member of the State Bar of California, admitted June 14, 1965
(date)
(2] The parties agree to be bound by the factual stipulations contained herein even If conclusions of law or
disposition are rejected or changed by the Supreme Coud.
(3) All investigations or proceedings listed by case number In the Caption of this stipulation are entirely
resolved by this stipulation, and are deemed consolidated. Dismissed charge(s)/count(s] are listed under
"Dismissals." The stipulation and order consist of ~ pages.
(4] A statement of acts or omissions acknowledged by Respondent as cause or causes for discipline Is
included under "Facts."
[5) Conclusions of law, drawn from and specifically referring to the facts are also Included under "Conclusions of
Law."
[6] The padies must include supporting authority for the recommended level of discipline under the heading
"Suppoding Authority."
(7) No more than 30 days prior to the filing of this stipulatlon, Respondent has been advised in wdtlng of any
pending investlgation/proceeding not resolved by this stipulation, except for criminal investigations.
[Stipulation form approved by SBC Executive Commilee | 0/16/2000. RevMed 12/I 612004,) Stayed Suspension
I
(Do not write above this line.)
(s) Payment of Discipllnary Costs---Respondent acknowledges the provisions of Bus. & Prof. Code §§6086.10 &
6140.7. (Check one optlon only):
(a] ~n costs added to membership tee for calendar year following effective date of dlsclpllne
(b] [] costs to be paid in equal amounts prior to February I for the following membership years:
(hardship, special circumstances or other good cause per rule 284, Rules of Procedure)
(c] [] co~ts walveq in Daft’ as set forth In a separate attachment entitled "Padial Waiver of Costs"
[d] [] costs entirely waived
B. Aggravating Clrcumstances [for deflnltlon, see Standards for Attorney Sanctions

for Professional Mlsconduct, standard 1.2[b]]. Facts supporting aggravating
circumstances are required.
(I] ~ Prior record of dlsclpllne [see standard 1.2(f)I
(a] ~n State Bar Court case # of prior case 0 0 -O- 115 6 6
(b] ~ Date prior discipline effective September 12, 200 2
[c) ~ Rules of Professional Conduct/State Bar ACt violations: Rules of Professional
Conduct, Rule 4-100(A)
[d] ~ Degreeofprlordisclpline Six months suspension~ stayed~ one year

probation.
(el ~ If Respondent has two or more Incidents of prior dlsclpllne, use space provided below or a
separateattachment entitled "Prior Discipline".
State Bar Case No. 89-0-12756; Date effective: May 15, 199~
Violations: Former Rules of Prof. Conduct, Rules 6-101(A) &
6-101(A) (2) [Both Rules now governed by Rule 3-110(A) ]
Degree of Discipline: Public Reproval
[2] [] Dishonesty: Respondent’s misconduct was surrounded by or followed by bad faith, dishonesty,
concealment, overreaching or other violations of the State Bar Act or Rules of Professional Conduct.
[3] [] 1,ust Vlolatlon: Trust funds or properly were involved and Respondent refused or was unable to account
to the client or person who was the object of the misconduct for improper conduct toward said funds or
property.
[4) [] Harm: Respondent’s misconduct harmed signitlcantly a client, the public or the admlnlstration of justice.
[5] [] Indifference: Respondent demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the
consequences of hls or her misconduct.
(Stipulation ton’n approved by SBC ExecutiVe Commitee I0/16/2(~00. Revised 12/16/2004,] Stayed Suspe~
2
[Do not write above this ilne.]
(6] [] Lack of Cooperation: Respondent displayed a lack of candor and cooperation to victims of his/her
misconduct or to the Stale Bar during disciplinary Invesflg~ion or proceedings.
(7] [] Multlple/Paftem of Misconduct: Respondents current misconduct evidences multlple acts of

wrongdoing or demonstrates a pattern of misconduct.
(8] [] No aggravatlng clrcumstances are involved.
Addltlonal aggravallng circumstances:
C. Mltlgatlng Circumstances [see standard 1.2(e]]. Facts supporting mltigatlng

circumstances are requlred.
[I] rn No Prior Dlsclpllne: Respondent has no prior record of discipline over many years of praclice coupled
with present misconduct which is not deemed serious.
(2] E~[ No Harm: Respondent did not harm the client or person who was the object of the misconduct.
[3) [] Candor/Cooperatlon: Respondent displayed sponlaneous candor and cooperation with the victims of
his/her misconduct and to the State Bar during disciplinary investigation and proceedings.
[4] ~ Remorse; Respondent promplly took objective steps spontaneously demonstrating remorse and
recognition of the wrongdoing, which steps were designed to timely atone for any consequences of his/her
misconducl.
[5] Restitution: Respondent paid $ on

in restitution Io without the threat or force of disciplinary, civil or
crimlna! proceedings.
[6] n Delay: These disciplinary proceedings were excessively delayed. The delay is not attributable to
Respondent and the delay prejudiced hln’~ner.
Good Faith: Respondent acted In good faith.
[8] Emotlonal/Physlcal Dlfflcultles: At the tlme of the stipulated act or acts of professional misconduct
Respondent suffered extreme emotional difficulties or physical disabilities which expert testimony would
establish was directly responsible for the misconduct. The difficulties or disabilities were not the product of
any illegal conduct by the member, such as Illegal drug or substance abuse, and Respondent no longer
suffers from such difflcu~lies or dlsabililles.
[9] [] Fatally Problems: At the time of the misconduct, Respondent suffered extreme difficulties In his/her
personal llfe which were other than emotional or physical in nature.
~3tlpulatfon form app~ov~ by SSC Executive Comm~lee 10/I 6/2[}00. Revls~:J 12/16/2004.] S~ayec~ Suspenslon
(Do nat write above this llne.]
[10] [] ~evere Flnanclal Stress: At the time of the misconduct. Respondent suffered from severe financial slre=
which resulted from circumstances not reasonably foreseeable or which were beyond hls/her control and
which were dlrecity responsible for the misconduct,
[I I] [] Good Character: Respondent’s good character is attested to by a wlde range of references In the legal
and general communities who are aware of the full extent of his/her misconduct.
[12] [] Rehabilitation: Considerable time has passed since the acts of professional misconduct occurred
followed by convincing proof of subsequent rehabilitation.
[13] n No mitigating circumstances are involved.
Additional mitigating circumstances:

The misconduct in this matter occurred during the same time period as
the misconduct in Case No. 00-0-11566, in which Respondent received
six months stayed suspension. See, In the Matter of Mapps, on page 8.
D. Discipllne
I. ~ StayedSuspenslon.
Respondent must be suspended from the practice of law for a period of eight ( 8 ) months
¯ [] and until Respondent shows proof satisfactory to the State Bar Court of rehabllitation and
present fitness to practice and present learning and ability In the law pursuant to standard
1.4[c](ii). Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct.
II. [] and until Respondent pays restitution as set fodh In the Financial Conditions form attached
to this Stipulation.
lit. 13 and until Respondent does the following:
[b] [] The above-referenced suspension is stayed,
2. ~ Probation.
Respondent Is placed on probation for a perlod ot’ one ( 1 ] year , which

will commence upon lhe effective date of the Supreme Coud order herein, (See role 953, California Rules
of Court.]
($rlpulation form approvecl by SBC Executive Commitee 10/16/2000. Revised 12116/2004,] Stayed Suspenslon
4
(Do not write above this line.]
Additional Conditions of Probation:
During the probation period, Respondent must comply with the provisions of the Slate Bar Act and
Rules of Professional Conduct.
Within ten (I O] days of any change, Respondent must report to the Membership Records Office of
the State Bar and to the Office of Probation of the Slate Bar of Cailfomla ["Office of Probation% all
changes of informatlon, including current office address and telephone number, Or other address
for State Bar purposes, as prescribed by section 6002. I of the Business and Professions Code.
(3] Within 30 days from the effective date of discipline, Respondent must contact the Office of
Probation and schedule a meeting wffh Respondent’s assigned probation deputy to discuss these
terms and conditions of probation. Upon the direction of the Office of Probation, Respondent must
meet with the probation deputy either in-person or by telephone. During the period of probation,
Respondent must promptly meet with the probation deputy as directed and upon request.
(4) I~ Respondent must submit written quarterly reports to the Office of Probation on each January I O,
April I O, July 10, and October I0 of the pedod of probation, Under penalty of perjury, respondent
must state whether respondent has compiled with the State Bar Act, the Rules of Professional
Conduct, and all conditions of probation dudng the preceding calendar quader. Respondent must
also state In each report whether there are any proceedings pending against him or her in the Slate
Bar Court and, if so, the case number and current status of that proceeding. If the first report would
cover less than 30 days, that repod must be submitted on the next quader date, and cover the
exter, ded period.
In addition to all quarter}y repods, a final report, containing the Same information, ~’s due no earlier
than twenty (20] days before the last day of the period of probation and no later than the last day
of probation.
[5) [] Respondent must be assigned a probat on mon for. Respondent must promptly review the terms
and conditions of probation with the probation monitor to establish a manner and schedule of
compliance. During the period of probation, Respondent must furnish to the monitor such reports
as may be requested, in addition to the quaderly reports required to be submiffed to the Office
of Probation. Respondent must cooperate fully with the probation monitor.
Subject to assertion of.appllcable prlvileges, Respondent must answer fully, promptly and
truthfully any inquiries of the Office of Probation and any probation monitor assigned under
these conditions which are directed to Respondent personally or in writing relating to whether
Respondent is complying or has complied with the probation conditions.
Within one (1 ] year of the effective date of the discipline herein, respondent must provide to the
Office of Probation satisfactory proof of attendance at a sesslon of the Ethics School, and passage .
of the test given at the end of that session.
[] NO Ethics School recommended. Reason:
[8] [] Respondent must comply with all conditions of probation imposed in the underlying criminal matter
and must so declare under penalty of perjury in conjunction with any quadedy report to be tiled
with the Office of Probation.
(9) [] The following conditions are attached hereto and incorporated:
D Substance Abuse Conditions [] Law Office Management Conditions
[] Medical Conditions Financial Conditions

(stipulalton form app~’oved by SBC Executive Commltee 10/16/2000. Revi~ed 12/16/2004.] Staye~ Suspension
5
[Do not write above this llne.]
F, Other Condltlons Negotiated by the Partles:
Multl~tate Professlonal Respon~Ibllity Examination: Respondent must provide proof of

passage of the Multlstate Professional Responsibility Examination ("MPRE"], admlnister~:l by the
National Conference of Bar Examlners. to the Office of Proballon within one year. Fallure to pass
the MPRE results In actual suspenslon wlthout further hearing until passage. But see rule
951[b], California Rules of Court, and rule 321(a][I] & |c], Rules of Procedure,-
[] No MPRE recommended. Reason:
(2] Other Condltions:
(Sllpulatfon form appmv~ by SBC Executive Commitee 10/16/2000. Revised 12116/2004.] Stayed Suspension
6
ATTACHMENT TO
IN THE MATTER OF: SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR.
CASE NUMBER(S): 0~O- 16067
FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
Respondent admits that the following facts are true and that he is culpable of violations of the
specified statutes and/or Rules of Professional Conduct:
1. Between in or about July 1999 and in or about June 2000, Gihan Wasef, Blanca
Preciado and Kerri Doman (hereinafter referred to as "the clients") each
employed Respondent to handle their respective personal injury matters.
2. Prior to employing Respondent, each of these clients had sought the assistance of
Robert Solo ("Solo"), a non-attorney. After agreeing to represent the clients,
Respondent allowed Solo to continue to assist in processing the cases.
3. Between in or about July 1999 and in or about June 2000, Solo told each of the
defendant insurance companies that he was an attomey. As a result, the defendant
insurance companies sent correspondence to Solo, addressing him as an attorney
in Respondent’s law office.
4. On or about July 20, 2000, a Request for Dismissal ("Dismissal") in one of the
personal injury matters, Wasef v.Yatouze, case no. 99K24624 was filed in the Los
Angeles Superior Court. The Dismissal was signed by Solo as the attorney for
Wasef.
5. Respondent failed to properly supervise Solo.
Page #
Attachment Page 1
LEGAL CONCLUSION
By allowing Solo to represent himself as an attorney to the defendant insurance companies and
by allowing Solo to file the Dismissal, Respondent failed to properly supervise Solo and
therefore failed to perform legal services competently.
PENDING PROCEEDINGS.
The disclosure date referred to, on page one, paragraph A.(7), was by letter dated April 13, 2005.
COSTS OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.

Respondent acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed respondent
that as of April 13, 2005, the estimated prosecution costs in this matter are approximately
$1,983. Respondent acknowledges that this figure is an estimate only and that it does not
include State Bar Court costs which will be included in any final cost assessment. Respondent
further acknowledges that should this stipulation be rejected or should relief from the stipulation
be granted, the costs in this matter may increase due to the cost of further proceedings.
AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.

In the Matter of Raymond E: Matins (1990) 1 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr 1:
The respondent’s multiple instances of misconduct occurred during the same period of time and
the respondent attributed them to the same circumstances he was in at that time. The court found
this to be properly considered in mitigation.
Wavsman v. State Bar (1986) 41 Cal. 3d 452:

The respondent was found culpable failing to supervise an employee resulting in commingling
and misappropriating $24,000 in client funds. The court found 6 months stayed suspension, 1
year probation was appropriate in light of the facts that strongly suggested respondent was
simply negligent and had no specific intent to defraud his clients.
Page #
Attacbxaent Page 2
Do not write above this line.]
In the Maffer of Case number(sJ: c~-o- 16067
SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES
By their signatures below, the parties and their counsel, as applicable, signify their agreement
with each of the recitations and each of the terms and conditions of this Stipulation Re Facts,
Conclusions of Law and Disposition.
~ture Sidney Franklin, Jr.

Print name
/-’(-2./-05" Susan Margolis

Date Res~ P~iht name
Shari Sveningson
Deputy Tdal Counsel’s slgnature Pdnt name
(stlp~l~3tlon form approved by SBC Executive Commllee 10/1612000. Revised 12116/2004.] Stayed Suspension
-9
3o not write above this line.]
In the Maffer of Case number[s]:
0~-O-16067
ORDER
Finding the stipulation to be fair to the parties and that it adequately protects the public,
IT IS ORDERED that the requested dismissal of counts/charges, if any, is GRANTED without
prejudice, and:
/[~j" The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED and the DISCIPLINE
RECOMMENDED to the Supreme Court.
The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED AS MODIFIED as set

forth below, and the DISCIPLINE IS RECOMMENDED to the Supreme Court.
All Hearing dates are vacated.
The parties are bound by.the stipulation as approved unless: I] a motion to withdraw or
modify the stipulation, tiled within 15 days after servlce of this order, is granted; or 2] this
court modifies or ~rther modifies the approved stipulation. [See r~Jle 135(b], Rules of
Procedure.] The effective date of this disposition Is the effective date of the
Supreme Court order herein, normally 30 days after file date. [See rule 953[a],
Callfornla Rules of Court.] ¯
.,~_.~
.../.~
Date
ROBERT M. TAL~OTT
[Slipulation form approved by SBC Executive Commilee 10/16/2000, Revised 12/16/2004.] $1ayed Suspension
I0
[Rule 62(b), Rules Proc,; Code Civ. Prae., § 1013a(4)]
I am a Case Administrator of the State Bar Court of Califomia. I am over the age of eighteen and
not a party to the within proceeding. Pursuant to standard court practice, in the City and County of
Los Angeles, on May 10, 2005, I deposited a true copy of the following document(s):

AND ORDER APPROVING, filed May 10, 2005
[X] by first-class mail, with postage thereon fully prepaid, through the United States Postal
SUSAN MARGOLIS, A/L

MARGOLIS & MARGOLIS
2000 RIVERSIDE DR
LOS ANGELES CA 90039-3758
[X] , by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California
SHARI SVENINGSON, A/L, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, Califomia, on May
10, 2005.
Rose M. Luthi
Case Administrator
State Bar Court
Certifi¢at¢ of Service.wFt
kwiktag ’~ 078 542 188
ORIGINAL
1 ¯OFFICE OF THE CHIEF TRIAL COUNSEL FILED
2 SCOTT J. D~XEL, No. 65670
CHeF T~ CO~SEL DI ~ ,’~ ~* ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~0~
3 RUSSELL G. WE~R, No. 94504 ~u~; ~ ~’-;~ i ~ff ~TAT~ BAR GOURT
DEPUTY CHeF T~ CO~SEL CLERKS OFFIG~
4 VICTO~ R. MOLLOY, No. 97747 LOS ANGELES
ASSISTANT CHeF T~ CO~SEL
5 J~T S. H~T, No. 97635
S~ERVIS~G T~L CO~SEL
6 AGUST~ HE~A~EZ, No. 161625
DEPUTY T~ CO~SEL
7 1149 South Hill Street
Los ~geles, California 90015-2299
8 Telephone: (213) 765-1713
12

)
14 SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR., )
No. 37135, ) NOTICE OF DISC~LINARY CHARGES
15 )
A Member of the State Bar. )
16
17 NOTICE - FAILURE TO RESPOND!
18 IF YOU FAIL TO FILE AN ANSWER TO THIS NOTICE WITHIN THE

TIME ALLOWED BY STATE BAR RULES, INCLUDING EXTENSIONS, OR
19 IF YOU FAIL TO APPEAR AT THE STATE BAR COURT TRIAL, (1) YOUR
DEFAULT SHALL BE ENTERED, (2) YOU SHALL BE ENROLLED AS AN
20 INACTIVE MEMBER OF THE STATE BAR AND WILL NOT BE
PERMITTED TO PRACTICE LAW UNLESS THE DEFAULT IS SET ASIDE
21 ON MOTION TIMELY MADE UNDER THE RULES OF PROCEDURE OF
THE STATE BAR, (3) YOU SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED TO
22 PARTICIPATE FURTHER IN THESE PROCEEDINGS UNLESS YOUR
DEFAULT IS SET ASIDE, AND (4) YOU SHALL BE SUBJECT TO
23 ADDITIONAL DISCIPLINE.
24 STATE BAR RULES REQUIRE YOU TO FILE YOUR WRITTEN

RESPONSE TO THIS NOTICE WITHIN TWENTY DAYS AFTER SERVICE.
25
IF YOUR DEFAULT IS ENTERED AND THE DISCIPLINE IMPOSED BY
26 THE SUPREME COURT IN THIS PROCEEDING INCLUDES A PERIOD OF
ACTUAL SUSPENSION, YOU WILL REMAIN SUSPENDED FROM THE
27 PRACTICE OF LAW FOR AT LEAST THE PERIOD OF TIME SPECIFIED
BY THE SUPREME COURT. IN ADDITION, THE ACTUAL SUSPENSION
28 WILL-CONTINUE UNTIL YOU HAVE REQUESTED, AND THE STATE
-1-
1 BAR COURT HAS GRANTED, A MOTION FOR TERMINATION OF THE
ACTUAL SUSPENSION. AS A CONDITION FOR TERMINATING THE
2 ACTUAL SUSPENSION, THE STATE BAR COURT MAY PLACE YOU ON
PROBATION AND REQUIRE YOU TO COMPLY WITH SUCH
3 CONDITIONS OF PROBATION AS THE STATE BAR COURT DEEMS
APPROPRIATE. SEE RULE 205, RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR STATE
4 BAR COURT PROCEEDINGS.
5 The State Bar of California alleges:

6 JURISDICTION
7 1. SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR. ("Respondent") was admitted to the practice of law in the
8 State of California on June 14, 1965, was a member at all times pertinent to these charges, and is
9 currently a member of the State Bar of California.
10 COUNT ONE
11 Case No. 04-0-12426

Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1-300(A)
12 [Aiding Unauthorized Practice of Law]
13 2. Respondent wilfully violated Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 1-300(A), by aiding
14 a person in the unauthorized practice of law, as follows:
15 3. At all relevant times including in or about 2001 and 2002, Respondent employed Jack
16 Ritter ("Ritter") to perform services at Respondent’s law office. During the period of Ritter’s
17 employment with Respondent, Ritter was a resigned member of the State Bar.
18 4. Ritter resigned from the State Bar with disciplinary charges pending on or about
19 September 10, 1993, and has never been readmitted to practice law in California.
20 5. During the period that he employed Ritter, Respondent knew or reasonably should
21 have known that Ritter was a resigned member of the State Bar.
22 6. On or about June 1, 2001, Manuel Delgado ("Delgado") went to Respondent’s law
23 office for legal representation regarding a personal injury matter. During the initial consultation,
24 Ritter misrepresented to Delgado that he was an attorney currently licensed to practice law in
25 California. After discussing his case with Ritter, Ritter told Delgado that Respondent’s office
26 would represent him for a contingency fee of 33 1/3 % if the matter settled before filing a
27 lawsuit, and 40 % if it settled after a lawsuit was filed. At that time, Delgado signed the retainer
28
-2-
1 agreement and employed Respondent to represent him in his personal injury claim. The retainer
2 agreement specifically indicated that Delgado employed Respondent.
3 7. Thereafter, Respondent assigned Ritter to work on Delgado’s case.
4 8. On or about August 25, 2001, Ritter sent a letter on Respondent’s letterhead to
5 Delgado confirming that he had employed Respondent’s law office to represent him in his
6 personal injury claim.
7 9. On or about September 14, 2001, Rosa Leanillo, a legal clerk employed by
8 Respondent, sent a letter on Respondent’s letterhead to Delgado asking him to call Respondent’s
9 law office to make an appointment to meet with Ritter.
10 10. Furthermore, on or about August 16, 2001, March 11, 2002, April 26, 2002, and
11 October 24, 2002, Delgado’s healthcare provider, Integrative Industrial & Family Practice
12 Medical Clinics, sent letters and bills addressed to Ritter as an attorney at Respondent’s address.
13 11. In or about early 2002, Delgado went to Respondent’s office to inquire about the
14 status of his case and to express his dissatisfaction with the lack of progress. During this visit,
15 Delgado spoke with Ritter, who informed him that the case was being reassigned to attorney
16 Johnita Ejercito ("Ejercito") who was an associate attorney in Respondent’s law office.
17 12. On or about January 14, 2002, Respondent caused to be filed a complaint on behalf
18 of Delgado in Los Angeles County Superior Court entitled Delgado v. Gallegos, et aL, case no.
19 VC035405 ("Delgado action"). At the time that the Delgado action was filed, Ejercito was
20 identified as the attorney of record for Delgado.
21 13. Thereafter, Delgado went to Respondent’s office again to inquire about the status of
22 his case and to express his dissatisfaction with the lack of progress. During this visit, Delgado
23 spoke with Ritter, who informed Delgado that he was retiring because of asthma and that the
24 case was being reassigned from Ejercito to Respondent. During this visit, Respondent
25 introduced himself to Delgado and told him that he would now be handling his case personally.
26 14. At no time did Ritter inform Delgado that he was a resigned member.
27 15. At no time did Respondent inform Delgado that Ritter was a resigned member.
28
-3-
1 16. At all relevant times, Delgado believed that Ritter was licensed to practice law in
2 California.
3 17. On or about May 31, 2002, Respondent filed a substitution of attorney with the court
4 formally substituting in as attorney of record for Delgado in the Delgado action.
5 18. In or about January 2004, Respondent settled the Delgado action.
6 19. By employing Ritter and allowing him to hold himself out as an attorney, and
7 allowing him to interview Delgado, give legal advice, determine whether to accept his case, and
8 set legal fees, Respondent wilfully aided a person in the unauthorized practice of law.
9 COUNT TWO
10 Case No. 04-0-12426

Business and Professions Code, section 6106
11 [Moral Turpitude: Misrepresentation]
12 20. Respondent wilfully violated Business and Professions Code section 6106 by
13 committing an act involving moral turpitude, dishonesty and corruption, as follows:
14 21. The allegations of paragraphs 3 through 18 are incorporated by reference.
15 22. On or about June 9, 2004, the State Bar opened an investigation in this matter
16 pursuant to a complaint filed by Delgado ("Delgado matter").
17 23. On or about June 21, 2004, a State Bar Investigator wrote a letter to Respondent
18 regarding the Delgado matter and asked him for a written response to the allegations. The letter
19 was sent to Respondent and he received the letter.
2O 24. In response to the State Bar Investigator’s June 21, 2004 letter, on or about July 27,
21 2004, Respondent sent a letter to the State Bar Investigator misrepresenting that he was first
22 employed by Delgado to substitute into the Delgado action in place of Ejercito after it had been
23 filed with the court. Respondent also misrepresented that Ritter was his landlord only and not
24 his employee. In reality, and as indicated in the retainer agreement, Delgado first employed
25 Respondent through Ritter on or about June 1, 2001, prior to the Delgado action being filed with
26 the court under Ej ercito’s name.

27 25. At the time that he sent his July 27, 2004 letter to the State Bar Investigator,
28 Respondent knew or was grossly negligent about the falsity of the contents of this letter.
-4-
1 26. By misrepresenting that he was first employed by Delgado to substitute into the
2 Delgado action in place of Ejercito after it had been filed with the court, and that Ritter was his
3 landlord only and not his employee, Respondent committed acts involving moral turpitude,
4 dishonesty or corruption.
5 COUNT THREE
6 Case No. 04-0-12426

Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1-311(B)
7 [Employment of Resigned Member]
8 27. Respondent wilfully violated Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 1-31 I(B), by
9 employing, associating professionally with, and aiding a person that Respondent knew or
10 reasonably should have known was a resigned member to render legal consultation or advice to a
11 client, to negotiate or transact any matter for or on behalf of a client with a third party, and to
12 engage in activities which constitute the practice of law, as follows:
13 28. The allegations of paragraphs 3 through 18, and 22 through 25 are incorporated by
14 reference.
15 29. By employing Ritter and assigning him to provide legal services to Delgado,
16 Respondent employed a person that Respondent knew or reasonably should have known was a
17 resigned member to engage in activities which constitute the practice of law.
18 COUNT FOUR
19 Case No. 04-0-12426

Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1-31 I(D)
20 [Failure to Notify State Bar of Employment of Resigned Member]
21 30. Respondent wilfully violated Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 1-311 (D), by
22 failing to serve upon the State Bar written notice of employment of a person who Respondent
23 knows or reasonably should have known is a resigned member of the State Bar, as follows:
25 reference.
26 32. At no time did Respondent serve the State Bar with written notice that he had
27 employed Ritter.
28
-5-
33. By employing Ritter without informing the State Bar in writing of the employment,
Respondent failed to serve upon the California State Bar written notice of employment of a
person Respondent knew or reasonably should have known to be a resigned member of the State
COUNT FIVE
6 Case No. 04-0-12426

Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1-31 I(D)
7 [Failure to Notify Client of Employment of Resigned Member]
8 34. Respondent wilfully violated Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 1-311(D), by
9 failing to serve written notice of employment of a person Respondent knows or reasonably
10 should know is a resigned member of the State Bar, upon each client on whose specific matter
11 such person will work, as follows:
13 reference.
14 36. At no time did Respondent serve Delgado with written notice that he had employed
15 Ritter to work on Delgado’s personal injury claim.
16 37. By employing Ritter to work on Delgado’s personal injury claim without informing
17 Delgado in writing of the employment, Respondent failed to serve written notice of employment
18 of a person Respondent knew or reasonably should have known to be a resigned member of the
19 State Bar, upon a client upon whose specific matter such person will work.
20
21 NOTICE - INACTIVE ENROLLMENT!
22 YOU ARE HEREBY FURTHER NOTIFIED THAT IF THE STATE BAR

COURT FINDS, PURSUANT TO BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE
23 SECTION 6007(c), THAT YOUR CONDUCT POSES A SUBSTANTIAL
THREAT OF HARM TO THE INTERESTS OF YOUR CLIENTS OR TO
24 THE PUBLIC, YOU MAY BE INVOLUNTARILY ENROLLED AS AN
INACTIVE MEMBER OF THE STATE BAR. YOUR INACTIVE
25 ENROLLMENT WOULD BE IN ADDITION TO ANY DISCIPLINE
RECOMMENDED BY THE COURT. SEE RULE 101(c), RULES OF
26 PROCEDURE OF THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA.
27 NOTICE - COST ASSESSMENT!
28
-6-
1 IN THE EVENT THESE PROCEDURES RESULT IN PUBLIC DISCIPLINE,
YOU MAY BE SUBJECT TO THE PAYMENT OF COSTS INCURRED BY
2 THE STATE BAR IN THE INVESTIGATION, HEARING AND REVIEW OF
THIS MATTER PURSUANT TO BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE
3 SECTION 6086.10. SEE RULE 280, RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE
STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA.
4
5 Respectfully submitted,
6 THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF TRIAL COUNSEL
7
9 Dated:
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-7-
1 DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY CERTIFIED MAIL
2 CASE NUMBER: 04-0-12426
3 I, the undersigned, over the age of eighteen (18) years, whose business address and
place of employment is the State Bar of California, 1149 South Hill Street, Los Angeles,
4 California 90015, declare that I am not a party to the within action; that I am readily familiar
with the State Bar of California’s practice for collection and processing of correspondence for
5 mailing with the United States Postal Service; that in the ordinary course of the State Bar of
California’s practice, correspondence collected and processed by the State Bar of California
6 would be deposited with the United States Postal Service that same day; that I am aware that
on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage
7 meter date on the envelope or package is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing
contained in the affidavit; and that in accordance with the practice of the State Bar of
8 California for collection and processing of mail, I deposited or placed for collection and
mailing in the City and County of Los :Angeles, on the date shown below, a true copy of the
9 within
10 NOTICE OF DISCIPLINARY CHARGES
11 in a sealed envelope placed for collection and mailing as certified marl, return receipt
requested, Article No.: 7160 3901 9844 3983 3006, at Los Angeles, on the date shown below,
12 addressed to:
13
14 SUSAN MARGOLIS
MARGOLIS & MARGOLIS LLP
15 2000 RIVERSIDE DRIVE
16
17 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Los Angeles, California, on the date shown below.
18
19
20 DATED: May 10, 2006 SIGNED: ~

FRANCES GO~
21 Declarant
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Franklin Sidney 37135 State Bar Discipline Binder2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Franklin Sidney 37135 State Bar Discipline Binder2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE STATE BAR OFFICE OF STATE BAR COURT

OF CALIFORNIA Senior Ezecu~ve. STUART A. FORSYTH

PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL

NOTICE ACCOMPANYING SERVICE OF

Attached is a copy of the Stipulation As To Facts and Disposition entered

In a facility regularly maintained by the United States Postal

Harland William Braun, Esq. William D. Klibanow, Esq.

I declare under penilty of perjury at Los Angeles, California, that the

State Bar Court

5 OF THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA

6 HEARING DEPARTMENT - LOS ANGELES

In the Matter of ) CASE NO. 89-O-12756-CWS

19 The court has examined the Stipulation and by this Order

2O modifies the same as follows:

21 i. On page 2, at line 22, the language "no previous

22 Stipulation in this matter has been submitted by the parties to

26 inserted "Review Department" when referring to the "Supreme

27 Court". The reference to the "Review Department" should be

modified to read "The Supreme Court". On page 2, lines 19, 26,

2 After reviewing the stipulated facts and conclusions of

3 law, I have determined that the Stipulation, as modified by this

4 Order, is fair as to facts and disposition and that the

5 disposition adequately protects the public interest. I find,

6 therefore, that there appears to be good cause for the approval of

7 the Stipulation as modified.

8 The Stipulation, as modified by this Order is binding on

9 the parties unless either party seeks to withdraw or modify it

10 pursuant to Rule 407(c) of the Rules of Procedure prior to action

14 FRAI~KLIN, JR., Case Number 89-0-12756 is~ROVED as MODIFIED. It

15 is recommended that Respondent be publicly reproved and that

16 Respondent be placed on probation for a period of two (2) years

2 the ordered conditions may constitute cause for a separate

3 proceeding for wilful breach of i-ii0, Rules of Professional

4 Conduct of the State Bar of California.

12 In the Matter of ) CASE NO. 89-0-12756

18 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the State Bar of

19 California, through its Examiner WILLIAM D. KLIBANOW, Re~nt,

20 SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR., hereinafter "Respondent," and HARLAND BRAUN,

21 Respondent’s counsel of record, in accordance with Rules 405

22 through 407 of the Transitional Rules of Procedure of the State

The Respondent, SIDNEY FRANKLIN, JR., was admitted to the

all times hereinafter mentioned was and is a member of the State

2 A. A Notice to Show Cause to commence formal proceedings

3 was filed in the above-entitled matter on August 9, 1990 and was

4 served upon Respondent through his counsel, HARLAND BRAUN, by

5 certified mail, return receipt requested, on August 13, 1990.

7 Notice to Show Cause.

8 B. It is now the intention of the State Bar and Respondent

9 to dispose of this matter by Stipulation as to Facts and

10 Discipline in accordance with Rules 405 through 407 of the

11 Transitional Rules of Procedure of the State Bar.

12 III. WAIVERS AND UNDERSTANDING OF THE PARTIES

13 A. The parties stipulate that this matter may be determined

14 by a hearing judge, pursuant to Rule 407(a) of the Transitional

15 Rules of Procedure of the State Bar.

16 B. It is understood and acknowledged by the parties to this

18 i. Stipulations as to proposed discipline are not

2 cause shown and upon application of a party made within fifteen

3 (15) days of service of the Order approving the Stipulation;

4 5. Pursuant to Rule 407(d) of the State Bar

5 Transitional Rules of~Procedure, if the hearing judge having

6 jurisdiction over this proceeding rejects this Stipulation as to

7 Facts and Discipline, the parties shall be relieved of all effects

8 of the Stipulation and the proceeding shall resume;