State Bar Court Recommends Suspending Lenore Again for One Year




Suspension (not of Lenore, but this was one of the few public domain photos of “suspension” that this blog considered printable in this context.  This blog advises against looking up images of “suspension” generally.)

An opinion by the California State Bar in the disciplinary matter of public figure and candidate for CDP Chair Lenore Albert found her culpable on six of eight charges and ordered recommended (among other things) that she face one year of actual suspension, to begin once a Supreme Court order comes out approving of its ruling.  That would come after an internal appeal, if Lenore wishes.  (We’re not asking Lenore whether she is going to appeal; we simply presume that she will.)  At that point, the case will go to the Supreme Court for disposition.  They seem to accept such recommendations pretty routinely, but presumably Lenore will fight being suspended so long as any flesh remains on her bones.

Page 1 of opinion outlining charges and sanctions.

Lenore Albert (she is apparently no longer using the surname Sheridan, at least here) was charged with misconduct in two client matters, one involving Dr. Nira Schwartz-Woods (where she was ordered to make restitution of $20,000 of fees in a patent case) and one involving Fin City Foods (where she was found to have defied a court order regarding paying damages to an opposing party.)

Of the charges visible in the graphic above, the court found no culpability on Charges 6 and 7, which involve her submitting to the court a putative retainer agreement that the client denied ever having received or signed.  The court declared that it could not conclude that it had clear and convincing evidence that this was an intentional attempt to defraud the court.


Suspension terms recommended to California Supreme Court.

The full opinion may be found at this link:  16-O-12958.

Note that neither of these charges involve Lenore’s involvement in representing victims of foreclosure.

About Greg Diamond

Somewhat verbose attorney, semi-disabled and semi-retired, residing in northwest Brea. Occasionally ran for office against jerks who otherwise would have gonr unopposed. Got 45% of the vote against Bob Huff for State Senate in 2012; Josh Newman then won the seat in 2016. In 2014 became the first attorney to challenge OCDA Tony Rackauckas since 2002; Todd Spitzer then won that seat in 2018. Every time he's run against some rotten incumbent, the *next* person to challenge them wins! He's OK with that. Corrupt party hacks hate him. He's OK with that too. He does advise some local campaigns informally and (so far) without compensation. (If that last bit changes, he will declare the interest.) His daughter is a professional campaign treasurer. He doesn't usually know whom she and her firm represent. Whether they do so never influences his endorsements or coverage. (He does have his own strong opinions.) But when he does check campaign finance forms, he is often happily surprised to learn that good candidates he respects often DO hire her firm. (Maybe bad ones are scared off by his relationship with her, but they needn't be.)