Robert Patterson California Bar Association Complaint
When Asked a Direct Question; Patterson Lied and Made Excuses for Violating State Law instead of Properly Advising Council.
THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA CALIFORNIA
ATTORNEY COMPLAINT FORM
(2) Attorney’s contact information:
Attorney’s name: Robert Leonard Patterson
Attorney’s address: 1800 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Attorney’s city, state & zip code: Palm Springs, California 92262
Attorney’s telephone number: (760) 322-2275
Attorney’s California bar license number: ______140074_______
The Securities and Exchange Commission has issued a Cease & Desist Order against the Beaumont Financing Authority. Page 6, Finding 24, requires the BFA to hire an Independent Consultant to submit a written report of BFA compliance with the SEC Cease and Desist Order.: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2017/33-10406.pdf
Beaumont refuses to stop forging government documents and hire qualified Staff. On November 8, 2017, Agenda Item 3, Beaumont City Council Approved hiring two Lawyers from Alabama that are not licenses to practice law in the State of California: https://beaumont.civicweb.net/document/9783/Item%203.pdf?handle=0D4CAE7E3AEB42E3AFFE78B2835E751B
Robert Leonard Patterson from the Law Firm of Slovak Baron Empey Murphy Pinkney was the designated City Attorney.
Judy Bingham recited Bar Association Requirements and California Government Code 11040 requiring that attorneys must be a member of the California Bar Association to practice law in the State of California.
Mayor Lloyd White asked Patterson about the legality of hiring out of State Lawyers that were not licensed with the California Bar Association and Patterson gave many excuses to circumvent State Laws:
Patterson: “As the City Manager mentioned previously; the Securities and Exchange Commission is responsible and has jurisdiction over Federal law, not State law. So the driving force here is under Federal Law, which is the same across all of the States in the Union. So in term of what State Law would apply here; there should not be a significant State Law component to this engagement.”
Federal Laws also require Attorneys to be admitted into the State Bar Associations’ in the States they are practicing law. Federal Laws supersede State Laws, but Federal Laws do not violate or negate State Laws.
Patterson: “Another aspect to look at is that they’re looking at policies and procedures. The question being; are they really practicing law? A lot of the things lawyers do on a day-to-day basis, particularly transactional lawyers, are things that can be done by other professionals as well because you’re not appearing in court, which is a pure lawyer function. A lot of the work that transactional lawyers do is business administration type of practice, which this might fall into.”
Why anyone would waste their money paying a lawyer to do clerical work I don’t know, but If they’re lawyers; they’re practicing law and must be licensed with the California Bar Association.
California Bar Association Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1-100
(1) “Law Firm” means:
(a) two or more lawyers whose activities constitute the practice of law, and who share its profits, expenses, and liabilities; or
(b) a law corporation which employs more than one lawyer; or
(c) a division, department, office, or group within a business entity, which includes more than one lawyer who performs legal services for the business entity; or
(d) a publicly funded entity which employs more than one lawyer to perform legal services.
(3) “Lawyer” means a member of the State Bar of California or a person who is admitted in good standing of and eligible to practice before the bar of any United States court or the highest court of the District of Columbia or any state, territory, or insular possession of the United States, or is licensed to practice law in, or is admitted in good standing and eligible to practice before the bar of the highest court of, a foreign country or any political subdivision thereof.
(4) “Associate” means an employee or fellow employee who is employed as a lawyer.
(2) As to lawyers from other jurisdictions who are not members:
These rules shall also govern the activities of lawyers while engaged in the performance of lawyer functions in this state; but nothing contained in these rules shall be deemed to authorize the performance of such functions by such persons in this state except as otherwise permitted by law.
Patterson: “And then I would also point to the fact that the Securities and Exchange Commission, as I understand it, has, as your City Manager said, ‘not disapproved’ of this Organization. I think that they have some very highly qualified lawyers there and if they thought that this were some kind of a violation of a State’s laws having to do with the practice of law they would have said something.”
First of all; Beaumont City Manager Todd Parton stated that the SEC responded that the Alabama Lawyers was not unacceptable, but did not include any documentation from the SEC and has refused to release the verification from the SEC to anyone – not even to Patterson. Patterson is taking the City Manager’s word that the SEC approved the Alabama lawyers. But also, the SEC is not responsible for the City’s compliance with State Laws nor can the SEC authorize the circumvention of State Laws.
Patterson: “Furthermore; you had your Bond Counsel (Brian Forebath) who is very conversant in these matters, who has also participated in the selection process, so I do not believe that that is an issue that you need to be – that would stop this from moving forward.”
Patterson was Beaumont’s acting City Attorney and is responsible for the City’s compliance with State and Federal Laws. Patterson was asked a direct question regarding the legality of hiring out of State lawyers that were not licensed to practice law in the State of California and Patterson lied and made excuses for violating State Law instead of properly advising Council.
California Public Contract Code 10335 (b) In exercising its authority under this article with respect to contracts for the services of legal counsel, other than the Attorney General, entered into by a state agency that is subject to Section 11042 or Section 10043 of the Government Code, the department, as a condition of approval of the contract, shall require the state agency to demonstrate that the consent of the Attorney General to the employment of the other counsel has been granted pursuant to Section 11040 of the Government Code.
California Government Code 11040:
(b) As used in this article:
(1) “In-house counsel” means an attorney authorized to practice law in the State of California who is a state employee, including an excluded or exempt employee, other than an employee of the Office of the Attorney General.
(2) “Outside counsel” means an attorney authorized to practice law in the State of California who is not a state employee, including an excluded or exempt employee.
California Government Code 11042:
(a) No state agency shall employ any in-house counsel to act on behalf of the state agency or its employees in any judicial or administrative adjudicative proceeding in which the agency is interested, or is a party as a result of office or official duties, or contract with outside counsel for any purpose, unless the agency has first obtained the written consent of the Attorney General pursuant to Section 11040.
(b) The Attorney General may provide written consent for a state agency to employ in-house counsel to represent the agency or its employees in any judicial or administrative adjudicative proceeding in whatever manner the Attorney General deems most effective and consistent with the intent of this article. However, a state agency shall obtain written consent for the use of outside counsel for a matter or matters for which the outside counsel is to be engaged before the execution of each contract with the outside counsel for the matter or matters.
(Amended by Stats. 2017, Ch. 17, Sec. 9. Effective June 27, 2017.)