On Friday, February 24, 2023, the Supreme Court of California disbarred attorney Charles P. Brown for his failure to file a response to the notice of disciplinary charges filed by the State Bar of California for his non-compliance with the conditions of his reproval.

The case is entitled “In the matter of Charles Brown”, and was brought by the State Bar of California with case no. s277810.

The charges cited California Rules of Professional Conduct 8.1.1. 

On March 11, 2022, a notice of disciplinary charges was filed against the respondent for his failure to comply with the conditions of his reproval. Specifically, the respondent failed to comply with the conditions attached to his public or private reproval in State Bar Court case number 19-c-30111s; a) failed to timely file a complete quarterly report; b) failed to submit proof of passing the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination; c) failed to timely file the State Bar Ethics School certificate of attendance, and d) failed to timely file a final report.

In the said notice, the State Bar of California stated that if the respondent failed to file a written answer within 20 days after the service of the same, the respondent’s status will be changed to inactive and he will not be permitted to practice law.

Unfortunately, the respondent failed to file his response causing the State Bar of California to file a renewed petition for disbarment after default for the respondent’s failure to file a timely response.

The filing states:

“Respondent was required to file an answer to the Notice within 20 days after service. (Rule 5.43, Rules of Proc.) Respondent failed to do so. On April 28, 2022, the State Bar filed and served a motion for entry of default by certified mail, return receipt requested, in compliance with rule 5.25 for service of an initial pleading.”

The filing continues:

“The respondent did not file a written response to the motion for entry of default within 10 days of service of the motion. On May 20, 2022, the Court issued an order entering the respondent’s default. This order included the language regarding the effects of default in prominent type required by rule 5.80(D). 1 The Court served the order on the respondent by mail in compliance with rule 5.25. The order entering default advised the respondent of the effects of the entry of default, specifically, deeming the facts alleged in the notice of disciplinary charges admitted, prohibiting participation unless the default is set aside, and if there is no timely motion to set aside, recommending disbarment without further hearing or proceeding.”

The filing further states:

“To date, the respondent has not filed a motion to set aside or vacate the default. Since the filing of the Motion for Entry of Default, the respondent has initiated contact with the State Bar six times, specifically on May 1, 2022, May 18, 2022, June 27, 2022, July 5, 2022, August 19, 2022, and August 22, 2022.”

In conclusion, the state bar stated that having satisfied all the required elements for a disbarment recommendation after default required by the rules of procedure, it recommended the respondent’s disbarment.

The order states:

“The court orders that Charles P. Brown (Respondent), State Bar Number 159358, is disbarred from the practice of law in California and that Respondent’s name is stricken from the roll of attorneys.”

Mr. Brown attended the Thomas Jefferson School of Law. He practices in Oceanside, California. He is licensed in California. Mr. Brown’s info can be found on lawyer.com.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.