Hear Ye! Hear Ye!
The Evil Esquire Bar Association is seeking public comment regarding the misadventures of California attorney Jonathan Daniel Newman, Xsquire [#101206], prior to accepting nominations for his induction into the EEBA. View Jonathan’s California Bar profile here: [Jonathan Daniel Newman]
The following is the California State Supreme Court’s order that precipitated Jonathan’s addition to the EEBA Watchlist.
» February 24, 2009, DISCIPLINED California Supreme Court Case: S169269
It is hereby ordered that JONATHAN DANIEL NEWMAN, State Bar No. 47353, be disbarred from the practice of law and that his name be stricken from the roll of attorneys.
JONATHAN DANIEL NEWMAN is also ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court, and to perform the acts specified in subdivisions (a) and © of that rule within 30 and 40 days, respectively, after the date this order is effective.
* Costs are awarded to the State Bar in accordance with Business and Professions Code section 6086.10 and are enforceable both as provided in Business and Professions Code section 6140.7 and as a money judgment.
*(See Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6126, subd. ©.)
* * * * * * STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA WARNING * * * * * *
According to the State Bar of California there were 161,729 lawyers actively “practicing” law in California on December 1, 2008. This equates to 1 lawyer for every 226 humans in the state!
Each year, formal complaints are filed against 8.5 percent of California’s active lawyer population. From 2004 through 2008 the Cal Bar disciplined only 3.1 percent of the lawyers regarding whom they received complaints. During this period, only 0.8 percent of complaints received by the Cal Bar from consumers of legal services i.e., victim clients, opposing parties, etc. resulted in disciplinary action against the offending lawyer.
Anecdotally, EvilEsq.com has found that the vast majority of attorneys the Cal Bar investigates are employed by small firms or are solo practitioners. Large law firms and lawyers who are partners or employed by large law firms are virtually immune from Cal Bar regulation, the exceptions being when federal law enforcement has intervened. The only conclusion we can draw from our survey is that the California Bar is highly political– read corrupt.
Consumers of legal services in California cannot rely on the Cal Bar to assist them in the event they become a victim of, for instance, one of the 13,529 attorneys complaints were filed against in 2008. Moreover, it is very difficult to discern whether or not an lawyer has engaged in “misconduct” or even illegal activity because the Cal Bar does not publish the complaints they “decline” to investigate. California consumers “roll the dice” every time they retain a lawyer and one out of twelve times they will make the wrong choice.
While California is certainly in the bottom quartile of U.S. “attorney discipline” systems, in our opinion, no state adequately protects consumers. EvilEsq.com can help to equalize this problem. If you have information regarding the attorney mentioned above please, comment on this post, rate the lawyer’s “evility” and assist others to find EvilEsq.com and this post by using the button to post a link to EvilEsq.com.
If you’ve filed a complaint against an attorney that your state’s bar overseers have “declined” to investigate, forward it along with any exhibits thereto for our consideration for publication.
If you know of a lawyer who’s worthy of induction to the EEBA? Send a brief summary of the lawyer’s “qualifications” along with his or her full name, state(s) of licensure and other identifying information to victims @ evilesq.com and, depending on their conduct, we’ll add them to our Nominee roles or Watchlist.
We strongly advise anyone contemplating hiring a California attorney use our LAWYER PROPHYLACTICS.


