In a recent development, the California State Bar Court’s decision to dismiss disciplinary charges against former bar Executive Director Joe Dunn has been upheld by an appellate panel. The panel, known as the State Bar Court’s Review Department, acts as an appellate body and found no abuse of discretion or error of law in the trial judge’s dismissal of some of the charges filed against Dunn by the bar.
The disciplinary claims against Dunn revolve around allegations that he misled the Board of Trustees regarding the source of funding for his trip to Mongolia and misrepresented opposition to pending legislation. The bar argued that the clock for the statute of limitations started ticking when the arbitration over Dunn’s 2014 termination concluded in 2017. It’s worth noting that Dunn, a former state lawmaker, sued the bar just weeks after firing in 2014. The disciplinary charges were filed in July 2022.
Review Judge Tamara M. Ribas, joined by Judge W. Kearse McGill, stated in their decision that the Board of Trustees, as the governing body of the State Bar, had already determined by November 2014 that Dunn had been untruthful with them. Consequently, they concluded that the five-year statute of limitations applies to the case.
However, Presiding Judge Richard Honn dissented from the majority opinion, arguing that the then-chief trial counsel, who raised concerns about Dunn’s actions, couldn’t be considered a complainant under bar rules. Therefore, Honn contended that the five-year statute of limitations should not apply in this situation.
Trust BCG Attorney Search to connect you with top legal employers in your area. Search now!
Reacting to the decision, Dunn’s co-counsel, Mark Geragos, expressed hope that the State Bar would recognize that this matter was manufactured and that the current issues faced by the bar outweigh any past grudges against their former CEO from a decade ago. Geragos emphasized the challenges the California Bar faced, particularly in light of the failure to discipline plaintiffs’ attorney Thomas Girardi, who was disbarred for misappropriation of funds.
While the dismissal of certain charges has been upheld, there are still remaining claims of moral turpitude regarding allegedly false remarks made by Dunn to the board. These remarks involved assurances that no bar funds would be used to finance his January 2014 trip to Mongolia, during which the state sought assistance on lawyer admission and discipline matters. Stacia Laguna, the special deputy trial counsel administrator, affirmed the seriousness of these remaining charges and expressed the intent to present evidence and prosecute them at the appropriate time.
The resolution of this case has implications for the California State Bar and its commitment to upholding ethical standards within the legal profession. As the proceedings continue, legal observers will closely monitor the developments, seeking clarity on the remaining charges and their potential impact on the bar’s reputation and credibility.