Judge: Yolanda Orozco, Case: 22STCP02374, Date: 2022-09-16 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCP02374    Hearing Date: September 16, 2022    Dept: 31

PETITION FOR JURISDICTION OVER LAW

PRACTICE OF SALVADOR ORTIZ IS APPROVED 

Background 

On June 23, 2022, the State Bar of California moved for an Order to assume jurisdiction over the law practice of Salvador Ortiz (“Ortiz”) under Bus. & Prof. Code section 6180 et seq.

Ortiz was admitted to the practice of law in the state of California on November 01, 2005. 

On March 32, 2021, Ortiz was suspended for a minimum of three years of a five-year suspension. 

Despite Ortiz’s suspension, he continues to engage in the unauthorized practice of the law. 

For this reason, the State Bar petitions this Court to assume jurisdiction over the law practice of Salvador Ortiz. 

On June 24, 2022, the State Bar applied ex parte for and was granted an interim order assuming jurisdiction over Ortiz’s law practice. 

Legal Standard 

Business and Professions Code section 6180 provides: 

“When an attorney engaged in law practice in this state dies, resigns, becomes an inactive licensee of the State Bar, is disbarred, or is suspended from the active practice of law and is required by the order of suspension to give notice of the suspension, notice of cessation of law practice shall be given and the courts of this state shall have jurisdiction, as provided in this article.” 

Section 6180.2 states: 

“Notwithstanding the giving of notice pursuant to Section 6180.1, the superior court on its own motion, or a client of the attorney, the State Bar, or an interested person or entity may make application to the superior court for the county where the attorney maintains or more recently has maintained his or her principal office for the practice of law or where he or she resides, for assumption by the court of jurisdiction over the law practice to the extent provided in this article. In any proceeding under this article, the State Bar shall be permitted to intervene and to assume primary responsibility for conducting the action.” 

Section 6180.3 states: 

“The application shall be verified, and shall state facts supporting the occurrence of one or more of the events stated in Section 6180 and either of the following:

(a) Belief that supervision of the court is warranted because the attorney has left an unfinished client matter for which no other active licensee of the State Bar has, with the consent of the client, agreed to assume responsibility.

(b) Belief that the interests of one or more clients of the attorney or of one or more other interested persons or entities will be prejudiced if the proceeding herein provided is not maintained.” 

Section 6180.4 states: 

“The application shall be set for hearing and an order to show cause shall be issued, directing the attorney, or his or her personal representative, or, if none, the person having custody and control of the files and records, to show cause why the court should not assume jurisdiction over the law practice as provided in this article. A copy of the application and order to show cause shall be served upon the person to whom it is directed by personal delivery or, as an alternate method of service, by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the attorney at the latest address shown on the official licensing records of the State Bar or to the personal representative at the latest address shown in the probate proceeding. Service is complete at the time of mailing, but any prescribed period of notice and any right or duty to do any act or make any response within that prescribed period or on a date certain after notice is served by mail shall be extended five days if the place of address is within the State of California, 10 days if the place of address is outside the State of California but within the United States, and 20 days if the place of address is outside the United States. If the attorney has a guardian or conservator, copies shall also be served upon such fiduciary in similar manner. If the State Bar is not the applicant, copies shall also be served upon the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel of the State Bar in similar manner at the time of service on the attorney. The court may prescribe additional or alternative methods of service of the application and order to show cause, and may prescribe methods of notifying and serving notices and process upon other persons and entities in cases not specifically provided for herein.” 

Section 6180.5 provides: 

“If the court finds that one or more of the events stated in Section 6180 has occurred, and that supervision of the courts is warranted because the affected attorney has left an unfinished client matter for which no other active licensee of the State Bar has with consent of the client agreed to assume responsibility, or that the interest of one or more of the clients of the attorney or one or more other interested persons or entities will be prejudiced if the proceeding herein provided is not maintained, it may make an order assuming jurisdiction over the attorney’s practice pursuant to this article. If the person to whom the order to show cause is directed does not appear the court may make its order upon the verified application or such proof as it may require. Thereupon the court shall appoint one or more active licensees of the State Bar to act under its direction to mail a notice of cessation of law practice pursuant to Section 6180.1 and may order such appointed attorneys to do one or more of the following:

(a) Examine the files and records of the law practice, and obtain information as to any pending matters which may require attention.

(b) Notify persons and entities who appear to be clients of the attorney of the occurrence of the event or events stated in Section 6180 and inform them that it may be to their best interest to obtain other legal counsel.

(c) Apply for an extension of time pending employment of such other counsel by the client.

(d) With the consent of the client, file notices, motions and pleadings on behalf of the client where jurisdictional time limits are involved and other legal counsel has not yet been obtained.

(e) Give notice to the depositor and appropriate persons and entities who may be affected, other than clients, of the occurrence of such event or events.

(f) Arrange for the surrender or delivery of clients’ papers or property.

(g) Arrange for the appointment of a receiver, where applicable, to take possession and control of any and all bank accounts relating to the affected attorney’s practice of law, including the general or office account and the clients’ trust account.

(h) Do such other acts as the court may direct to carry out the purposes of this article.

The court shall have jurisdiction over the files and records and law practice of the affected attorney for the limited purposes of this section, and may make all orders necessary or appropriate to exercise this jurisdiction. The court shall provide a copy of any order issued pursuant to this article to the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel of the State Bar.” 

Section 6180.8 states: 

“Upon a finding by the court that it is more likely than not that the application will be granted and that delay in making the orders described in Section 6180.5 will result in substantial injury to clients, or to others, the court, without notice or upon such notice as it shall prescribe, may make interim orders containing such provisions as the court deems appropriate under the circumstances. Such order shall be served in the manner provided in Section 6180.4, and if the application and order to show cause have not yet been served, they shall be served at the time of serving the order made pursuant to this section.” 

Discussion 

The State Bar of California (“Petitioner” or “State Bar”) moves the Court to assume jurisdiction over the law practice of Salvador Ortiz, a suspended member of the State Bar, and for an order appointing George S. Cardona, Chief Trial Counsel of the State Bar of California, and his designees, to take possession and control of client files and undertake such other duties as may be required to protect the interests of clients and others pursuant to Business and Professions Code section 6180, et seq.  

                     Statement of Facts 

As evidence for approval of this application, the State Bar presents the Declarations of Claudia Peña, Christopher Garcia, Andres Torres, and Rosendo Buenrostro to support the findings that: 

1)     Supervision is warranted because Ortiz has left at least one unfinished client matter for which no other active licensee of the State Bar has, with the consent of the client, agreed to assume responsibility; and

2)     There is strong evidence that the interests of one or more of Ortiz’s clients or of one or more other interested persons or entities will be prejudiced if the proceeding herein provided is not maintained. 

Salvador Ortiz was admitted to the practice of law in the state of California on November 01, 2005, and his principal place of business is 617 S. Olive St., Ste. 615, Los Angeles, CA 90014-1627. 

On or about November 20, 2017, Ortiz was suspended from the practice of law before the Board of Immigration Appeals, Immigration Courts, and the Department of Homeland Security and subsequently disbarred. (Peña Decl. Ex. 5, 6.) 

On March 32, 2021, Ortiz was suspended for a minimum of three years of a five-year suspension and is not eligible to practice law in California. (Peña Decl. Ex. 7.) There are currently 11 open investigations against Ortiz which allege professional misconduct and violations of the Business and Professions Code and the Rules of Professional Conduct. (Peña Decl. ¶¶ 11-14.) 

The State Bar presents evidence that despite his suspension, Ortiz continues to be engaged in the unauthorized practice of law and continues to hold himself out as an attorney, continues to operate his law firm, retain new clients, give legal advice, and accept legal fee payments. (Peña Decl. ¶¶44-45, Ex. 14A, 14B; see generally Garcia Decl.; Torres Decl.; Buenrostro Decl.) 

On or about January 24, 2022, Ortiz, as “an individual dba Salvador Ortiz Law Office,” executed a First Lease Amendment with 617 Olive LLC as to the office space located at 617 Olive Street, Suite 615, Los Angeles, California, 90014. (Peña ¶ 46, Ex. 15.) 

The State Bar has presented sufficient evidence that Ortiz continues to engage in the unauthorized practice of the law. Moreover, the State Bar has a strong interest in assuming jurisdiction to prevent further and future harm to current and potential clients, an interested person, or an entity. 

For the reasons stated, the application for assumption of jurisdiction over Salvador Ortiz’s law practice is granted.  

Conclusion 

The application for assumption of jurisdiction over Salvador Ortiz’s law practice is granted.  

The parties are strongly encouraged to attend all scheduled hearings virtually or by audio. Effective July 20, 2020, all matters will be scheduled virtually and/or with audio through the Court’s LACourtConnect technology. The parties are strongly encouraged to use LACourtConnect for all their matters. All masking protocols will be observed at the Courthouse and in the courtrooms.