Seth Weinstein Law

Category: Blog

  • California Financial License Defense Case Results

    In the Matter of the California Department of Insurance Accusation Against Insurance Agent: The California Department of Insurance filed an Accusation against a Los Angeles based Insurance company. The client previously received FINRA discipline due to failing to report unpaid debts. The client entered into a Consent Agreement with FINRA that he failed to report to the California Department of Insurance. The client presented extensive character rehabilitation, mitigation and evidence of future prospects via a settlement proposal. The California Department of Insurance entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client. The client received a Restricted Insurance License.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Insurance Accusation Against Insurance Agent: The California Department of Insurance filed an Accusation against a San Francisco Bay-Oakland based Insurance Agent employed at an international bank. The client was convicted of misdemeanor Domestic Battery. The client only reported the criminal conviction to FINRA, but failed to report the conviction to the California Department of Insurance. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Oakland. At Hearing, the client submitted evidence of character rehabilitation. The client demonstrated that he was not a danger to the public as an Insurance Agent. The Administrative Law Judge granted the Insurance Agent probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Insurance Accusation Against Insurance Agent: The California Department of Insurance filed an Accusation against a San Francisco Bay-Oakland based Insurance Agent employed at a national insurance company. The client had three Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (DUI) convictions in a two year period of time. The client was also alleged to have failed to notify the California Department of Insurance of his criminal convictions. The California Department of Insurance entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client. The client received a Restricted Insurance License.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Insurance Accusation Against Insurance Agent: The California Department of Insurance filed an Accusation against a Los Angeles based Insurance Agent. The client was convicted in Alameda County for Accessory After the Fact to a Narcotics offense. The client was also alleged to have failed to notify the California Department of Insurance of his criminal convictions. The California Department of Insurance entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client. The client received a Restricted Insurance License.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Insurance Accusation Against Insurance Agent: The California Department of Insurance filed an Accusation against an Arizona based Insurance Agent with a large clientele in Los Angeles. The client had two Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (DUI) convictions in a three year period of time. The client was also alleged to have failed to notify the California Department of Insurance of his criminal convictions. The California Department of Insurance entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client. The client received a Restricted Insurance License.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Insurance Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Insurance License Applicant: A Los Angeles based State Farm employee sought to obtain an Insurance License. However, the client was denied an Insurance License due to a five year old misdemeanor conviction for Selling Counterfeit merchandise. The client presented extensive character rehabilitation, mitigation and evidence of future prospects via a settlement proposal. The California Department of Insurance entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client. The client received a Restricted Insurance License.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Insurance Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Insurance License Applicant: A Los Angeles based Insurance company employee sought to obtain an Insurance License. However, the client was denied an Insurance License due prior discipline imposed on his Real Estate Salesperson License from the California Department of Real Estate. The client presented extensive character rehabilitation, mitigation and evidence of future prospects via a settlement proposal. The Department of Insurance entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client. The client received a Restricted Insurance License.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Insurance Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Insurance License Applicant: A Los Angeles based Insurance company employee sought to obtain an Insurance License. However, the client was denied an Insurance License due five misdemeanor criminal convictions that he failed to report on his application to the California Department of Insurance. The misdemeanor criminal convictions included three Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (DUI) convictions and two Driving on Suspended License convictions. The client presented extensive character rehabilitation, mitigation and evidence of future prospects via a settlement proposal. The Department of Insurance entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client. The client received a Restricted Insurance License.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Insurance Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Insurance License Applicant: A San Jose based Insurance company employee sought to obtain an Insurance License. However, the client was denied an Insurance License due three misdemeanor criminal convictions. The misdemeanor criminal convictions included two Petty Theft convictions and one Possession of a Controlled Substance conviction. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Oakland. The client presented evidence of substance abuse rehabilitation, character rehabilitation and solid future prospects. The Administrative Law Judge granted the client a Restricted Insurance License.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Insurance Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Insurance License Applicant: An Orange County based Insurance company employee sought to obtain an Insurance License. However, the client was denied an Insurance License due two felony criminal convictions and one misdemeanor criminal conviction. The felony criminal convictions were for Commercial Burglary and Forgery. The misdemeanor criminal conviction was for Possession of a Controlled Substance. The most recent conviction occurred nine years prior to the application. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Oakland. The client presented evidence of substance abuse rehabilitation, character rehabilitation and solid future prospects. The Administrative Law Judge granted the client a Restricted Insurance License.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Insurance Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Insurance License Applicant: A Los Angeles employee of a large, national Insurance Company, sought to obtain an Insurance License. However, the client was denied an Insurance License due to four criminal convictions that occurred in the client’s last year of college. The misdemeanor criminal convictions were for Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (DUI), Public Intoxication, Disorderly Conduct and Urinating in Public. The most recent conviction occurred five years prior to the application. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. The client presented evidence of remorse, character rehabilitation and positive future prospects. The Administrative Law Judge granted the client a Restricted Insurance License.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Insurance Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Insurance License Applicant: A Los Angeles employee of a large, national Insurance Company, sought to obtain an Insurance License. However, the client was denied an Insurance License due to two misdemeanor criminal convictions that occurred when the client was younger. The misdemeanor criminal convictions were for Possession of Burglary Tools and Theft. The most recent conviction occurred six years prior to the application. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. The client presented evidence of remorse, character rehabilitation and positive future prospects. The Administrative Law Judge granted the client a Restricted Insurance License.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Real Estate Accusation Against Real Estate Salesperson: The California Department of Real Estate filed an Accusation against a Los Angeles based Real Estate Salesperson employed at a high powered Beverly Hills Real Estate firm. The client was convicted of misdemeanor Second Offense Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (DUI) and misdemeanor Tampering With a Vehicle. The client failed to report the convictions to the California Department of Real Estate. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. At Hearing, the client submitted evidence of character rehabilitation. The client demonstrated that she was not a danger to the public as a Real Estate Agent. The Administrative Law Judge granted the Real Estate Salesperson a Restricted License with probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Real Estate Accusation Against Real Estate Salesperson: The California Department of Real Estate filed an Accusation against a Los Angeles based Real Estate Salesperson employed at leasing agency. The client was convicted of felony Grand Theft, misdemeanor DUI and misdemeanor Possession of a Controlled Substance. The California Department of Real Estate refused a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) in the matter. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. At Hearing, the client submitted evidence of substance abuse treatment and character rehabilitation. The client demonstrated that she was not a danger to the public as a Real Estate Agent. The Administrative Law Judge granted the Real Estate Salesperson a Restricted License with probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Real Estate Accusation Against Real Estate Broker: The California Department of Real Estate filed an Accusation against an Orange County Real Estate Broker. The Accusation was based on the concept of reciprocal discipline. The client previously received discipline from the California Department of Real Estate Appraisers. The client failed to report the discipline to the BRE. The client submitted evidence of character rehabilitation. The Real Estate Broker entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the BRE. The client received a BRE Restricted License and probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Real Estate Accusation Against Real Estate Broker: The California Department of Real Estate filed an Accusation against a Riverside County based Real Estate Broker. The client was convicted of felony Hit & Run in Riverside County. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. At Hearing, the client explained the circumstances surrounding the conviction and submitted evidence of character rehabilitation. The client demonstrated that he did not present a danger to the public as a Real Estate Agent. The Administrative Law Judge granted the Real Estate Broker a Restricted License with probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Real Estate Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Real Estate Salesperson License Applicant: The California Department of Real Estate denied the Real Estate Salesperson license of a Bakersfield Real Estate company employee. The denial was based on the revocation of the client’s Registered Nursing License from the California Board of Registered Nursing. Furthermore, the client had been convicted of a criminal offense from Diverting Medication from the hospital where she had been previously employed. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. At Hearing, the client submitted evidence of character rehabilitation. The client demonstrated that she was not a danger to the public as a Real Estate Agent. The Administrative Law Judge granted the client a Restricted Real Estate Salesperson License with probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Real Estate Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Real Estate Salesperson License Applicant: The California Department of Real Estate denied the Real Estate Salesperson license of a Los Angeles real estate developer. The denial was based on the client’s misdemeanor criminal convictions for Assault and Trespass. Furthermore, the client failed to report his convictions on his Real Estate Salesperson License application to the California Department of Real Estate. Prior to the matter proceeding to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles, a settlement proposal was tendered to the California Department of Real Estate. The California BRE entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client. The client received a two year Restricted License.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Business Oversight Accusation Against Mortgage Loan Originator: The client, a Los Angeles Mortgage Loan Originator, received an Accusation from the California Department of Business Oversight. The Accusation occurred due to the concept of reciprocal discipline. The MLO had previously been disciplined in Nevada for Originating Loans Without a License. Due to substantial mitigation presented on behalf of the client, the California Department of Business Oversight entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client for minor discipline. The client paid a substantial fine.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Business Oversight Summary Revocation Order Against Commercial Finance Lender: The client, a Commercial Finance Lender in both California and Illinois, received a Summary Revocation Order from the California Department of Business Oversight. The Summary Revocation Order occurred due to the failure to file the required Annual Report. Our firm filed a Petition for Reconsideration to overturn the Summary Revocation Order. In addition, our firm filed a companion Settlement Proposal to request a settlement from DBO. Due to substantial mitigation presented on behalf of the client, the California Department of Business Oversight entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client for minor discipline. The client paid a fine and the Commercial Finance Lender License was reinstated.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Motor Vehicles Accusation Against Vehicle Dealer (Used Car Dealer): The client, aSan Jose used car dealer (Vehicle Dealer), received an Accusation from the California Department of Motor Vehicles. The allegations included the failure of the dealership to promptly transfer car titles and file DMV paperwork. Prior to a Hearing before the Office of Administrative Hearings in Oakland, DMV reached a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client. The Vehicle Dealer was placed on two years probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Motor Vehicles Accusation Against Vehicle Salesperson: The client, a licensed Vehicle Salesperson in Los Angeles, received an Accusation from the California Department of Motor Vehicles. The client was convicted of a felony offense. Pursuant to the California Department of Motor Vehicles disciplinary guidelines for Occupational licensees, the client should have received a revoked license. The matter was scheduled for a Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. Prior to the Hearing, due to substantial mitigation presented on behalf of the client, the California DDMV entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client for probation under standards terms and conditions.

    In the Matter of the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Repossession Agency Employee Registration Applicant: The client desired to receive a Repossession Agency Employee Registration. The client possessed seven criminal convictions; five felony convictions and two misdemeanor convictions. The felony convictions were all Sex Offense crimes. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. The client presented evidence of rehabilitation and positive moral character. The Administrative Law Judge granted the client a Repossession Agency Employee Registration under terms and conditions of probation.

  • California Business License Defense Case Results

    In the Matter of the California Air Resources Board Notice of Violations Against Michigan Manufacturer: The client, a Michigan manufacturer of aftermarket Electronic Control Units (ECUs), received an investigation notice from the California Air Resources Board, known as CARB, or ARB. ARB commenced an investigation into the Michigan company for a number of vehicle violations. These ECUs allegedly led to an increase in emissions and violated a number of California Air Pollution Control rules and regulations. ARB issued the company Notices of Violation. The company faced fines and penalties of $12,800,000. At a Settlement Conference, ARB offered to settle the matter for $650,000. After a successful negotiation, the Michigan company paid ARB a fine of $50,000.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Adult Day Care: The client, a Ventura County Adult Day Care Facility, received an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. The allegations included Conduct Inimical, Lack of Supervision, Negligence and Violation of Personal Rights. Several violations were alleged against the facility, including the failure of staff to report client abuse and the use of clients to care for other clients. Other serious violations included a staff member was caught with narcotics and another staff member was working even though she was subject to a CDSS Exclusion Order. The Adult Day Care entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the California Department of Social Services. The client was placed on California Department of Social Services probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Adult Residential Facility (ARF): A Los Angeles Adult Residential Facility (ARF) received an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. CDSS alleged that the Administrator engaged in dishonesty by failing to attend required continuing education classes. The evidence presented by DSS actually supplemented the client’s version of events. The matter proceeding to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. The Administrative Law Judge found that the client was negligent, rather than engaged in intentional misconduct. The Administrative Law Judge allowed the client to retake the classes and did not discipline the ARF Administrator.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Adult Residential Facility (ARF) Administrator: A Los Angeles Adult Residential Facility (ARF) Administrator received an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. CDSS alleged that the Administrator engaged in dishonesty by failing to attend required continuing education classes. The Administrator attended a DSS sponsored program that promoted the incorrect continuing education courses. Prior to a Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles, CDSS reached a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client. The California Department of Social Services placed the ARF Administrator on probation with standard terms and conditions.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Children’s Group Home: The client, a Bakersfield Children’s Group Home, received an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. The allegations included Conduct Inimical, Lack of Supervision, Negligence and Violation of Personal Rights. Dozens of violations were alleged against the facility, including numerous instances of children fighting and running away from the facility. Other serious violations included the improper use of physical restraints on children by staff members and improper training of staff members. The Children’s Group Home entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the California Department of Social Services. The client was placed on California Department of Social Services probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Children’s Group Home: The client, a Bakersfield Children’s Group Home, received an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. The allegations included Conduct Inimical, Lack of Supervision, Negligence and Violation of Personal Rights. Several violations were alleged against the facility, including the improper use of physical restraints on children by staff members and improper training of staff members. Other violations included facility maintenance issues and improper record keeping. The Children’s Group Home entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the California Department of Social Services. The client was placed on California Department of Social Services probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Preschool: A large Preschool in the Hollywood neighborhood of Los Angeles received an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. The allegations included Conduct Inimical, Lack of Supervision, Negligence and Violation of Personal Rights. A child escaped from the facility and was found approximately twenty minutes later by a Good Samaritan wandering on a busy Hollywood street. The Los Angeles Police responded and took the child into protective custody. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. The Administrative Law Judge granted the Preschool probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Preschool: The client, a Los Angeles Preschool, received an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. The allegations included Conduct Inimical, Lack of Supervision, Negligence and Violation of Personal Rights. A parent made allegations that teachers hit their child at the Preschool. The California Department of Social Services further alleged that the Preschool failed to report the assault to the California Department of Social Services. Additional issues included facility violations. The Preschool entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the California Department of Social Services. The client was placed on California Department of Social Services probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Preschool: The client, a San Diego Preschool, received an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. The allegations included Conduct Inimical, Lack of Supervision, Negligence and Violation of Personal Rights. During a field trip, a child went missing, causing a massive police search. The incident made local headline news. The Preschool entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the California Department of Social Services. The client was placed on California Department of Social Services probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Preschool: The client, a San Jose Preschool, received an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. The allegations included Conduct Inimical, Lack of Supervision, Negligence and Violation of Personal Rights. The Preschool was alleged to have committed over two dozen violations. These violations were related to improper staff to student ratio, overcapacity and Building Code Violations. The Preschool entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the California Department of Social Services. The client was placed on California Department of Social Services probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Family Child Care Home: The client, a Los Angeles Family Child Care Home received an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. The Accusation sought to revoke the owner’s Criminal Records Exemption. Seven years prior, the client worked in a private capacity as an elderly caretaker. Several years subsequent to employment, the elderly patient’s family made allegations that the client committed Theft from the elderly patient. Several years later, the California Department of Social Services filed an Accusation based on the aforementioned allegations. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. The Administrative Law Judge dismissed the Accusation in its entirety. No discipline was imposed.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Family Child Care Home: An Orange County Family Child Care Home faced an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. The Accusation alleged Conduct Inimical, Lack of Supervision, Negligence and Violation of Personal Rights. A parent made a complaint against the Home Day Care because another student had allegedly bitten her child numerous times. The Home Day Care also faced allegations of improper ratios of staff to children, lack of supervision and facility violations. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge at the California Office of Administrative Hearings. While assigned to the Los Angeles office, the Hearing occurred in Orange County. The Administrative Law Judge granted the Family Child Care Home probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Family Child Care Home: A Bakersfield Family Child Care Home received a Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. The allegations included Conduct Inimical, Lack of Supervision, Negligence and Violation of Personal Rights. The owners of the Family Child Care Home were also former Foster parents. While fostering a child, one of the owners of the Family Child Care Home spanked the child. This resulted in the filing of the disciplinary Accusation to revoke the Family Child Care Home License. Due to extensive mitigation presented, the California Department of Social Services agreed to a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) for probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Family Child Care Home: The client, a Bakersfield Family Child Care Home received an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. The allegations included Conduct Inimical, Lack of Supervision, Negligence and Violation of Personal Rights. The client allegedly improperly supervised children at a playground. The California Department of Social Services alleged that as a result, a fistfight occurred between two children in care. Furthermore, it was alleged that a minor improperly transported a child under the client’s care, the client dispensed medication to a child without parental permission and the smoke detector at the facility did not properly function. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. The Administrative Law Judge granted the Family Child Care Home probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Family Child Care Home: The client, a Los Angeles Family Child Care Home received an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. The allegations included Conduct Inimical, Lack of Supervision, Negligence and Violation of Personal Rights. The owners of the Family Child Care Home were unavailable to an emergency. They left the Family Child Care Home in the care of friends. The California Department of Social Services conducted a random inspection of the Family Child Care Home. The random inspection determined an improper ratio, staff to children, overcapacity, the availability of dangerous substances and a lack of supervision. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. The Administrative Law Judge granted the Family Child Care Home probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Family Child Care Home: A Ventura County Family Child Care Home received an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. The allegations included Conduct Inimical, Lack of Supervision, Negligence and Violation of Personal Rights. A child escaped from the Family Child Care Home and was found approximately forty five minutes later by a Ventura Police Officer. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings. The matter was assigned to the OAH Los Angeles Office, but the Hearing occurred in Ventura County. The Administrative Law Judge granted the Family Child Care Home probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Against Family Child Care Home: A Bakersfield Family Child Care Home received an Accusation from the California Department of Social Services. The allegations included Conduct Inimical and Negligence. The licensee’s son, a Registered Sex Offender, used the licensees address as his own address for a period of time. As a result, the California Department of Social Services initiated a disciplinary Accusation. The licensee presented substantial mitigation evidence on behalf of the Family Child Care Home. Prior to a Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles, CDSS reached a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client. The California Department of Social Services placed the Family Child Care Home on probation with standard terms and conditions.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Accusation Foster Care Home: A San Bernardino County husband and wife teacher received an Accusation (Exclusion Accusation) from the California Department of Social Services. CDSS alleged Conduct Inimical arising from allegations of child abuse, child neglect and facility violations. The evidence against the couple was weak. However, DSS refused to enter into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the husband and wife. The matter proceeding to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Riverside. The Administrative Law Judge found the evidence against the couple weak, but agreed that the home needed upgrades. The husband and wife were placed on disciplinary probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Exclusion Accusation Against Child Care Center Teacher: A Los Angeles Child Care Center Teacher received an Accusation (Exclusion Accusation) from the California Department of Social Services. The allegations included Conduct Inimical, Lack of Supervision, Negligence and Violation of Personal Rights. The teacher was accused of using a plastic bat in a dangerous and intimidating manner and hitting a child with the plastic bat. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. During the Hearing, CDSS and the client entered into a Stipulated Agreement, whereby the client admitted to using the plastic bat in an inappropriate manner, and was placed of two years of CDSS probation.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Exclusion Accusation Against Preschool Teacher: A Ventura County Preschool teacher received an Accusation (Exclusion Accusation) from the California Department of Social Services. CDSS alleged Conduct Inimical. The teacher was accused of felony Domestic Violence for allegedly assaulting her husband at home due to a psychological breakdown. The client underwent a psychological evaluation and demonstrated her mental fitness. Prior to a Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles, DSS offered the client a Stipulated Agreement (settlement). The client agreed to three years of disciplinary probation from the California Department of Social Services.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Preschool License Applicant: The client sought to open a Preschool in the Los Angeles area. The client was involved in major civil litigation with family members. The civil litigation caused the California Department of Social Services to deny the client’s Preschool license. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. The allegations against the client were found to be speculative and not credible. The Administrative Law Judge dismissed the Statement of Issues in its entirety. The client received Preschool License. No discipline was imposed.

    In the Matter of the California Department of Social Services Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Foster Family Home License Applicant: The client, a highly educated corporate executive in Los Angeles, was denied a Criminal Records Exemption due to a misdemeanor Battery conviction. The conviction occurred twenty six years prior to the application to become a Foster Family Home. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. The client presented substantial evidence of honesty, positive moral character and trustworthiness. The Administrative Law Judge dismissed the Accusation in its entirety. The client received a Criminal Records Exemption to become a Foster parent. No discipline was imposed.

    In the Matter of the California Bureau of Private Postsecondary Education Statement of Issues (License Denial/Denial of Operating Approval) of Radio Broadcasting School: The client, a Radio Broadcasting school, sought licensure and operating approval from the California Bureau of Private Postsecondary Education. The BPPE denied the Radio Broadcasting school operating approval due to deficiencies in the application for licensure. These deficiencies included improperly trained faculty, a confusing grading system, a lack of equipment and facility violations. Upon revising the application and authoring a settlement proposal, the BPPE dismissed the Statement of Issues. The Radio Broadcasting school received licensure and approval to operate.

    In the Matter of the California Bureau of Private Postsecondary Education Citation Against Non Approved School: The client, a Firearms Training Facility in San Bernardino County, licensed by the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services, received a $100,000 Citation from BPPE for operating without approval. The Citation stemmed from an allegation that the Firearms Training Facility conducted classes outside the scope of its BSIS licensure. Mitigation evidence showed that the Firearms Training Facility stopped conducting the unapproved classes and did not make a significant profit. The California Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education reduced the Citation to $10,000.

    In the Matter of the California Bureau of Private Postsecondary Education Citation Against Non Approved School: The client, a speed typing tutor for Court Reporters located in Riverside County, received a $75,000 Citation from BPPE for operating without approval. The Citation arose from an allegation that the Court Reporters speed tutor offered a certificate upon completion of a tutoring program. Mitigation evidence showed that the tutor only advertised a certificate of completion, but had never actually issued a certificate of completion. Furthermore, the tutor did not offer a tutoring program; but merely a series of tutoring sessions designed to increase typing speed for Court Reporters. The California Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education reduced the Citation to $10,000.

    In the Matter of the California Bureau of Automotive Repair Accusation Against Automotive Repair Dealer: An Automotive Repair Dealer in Riverside County faced an Accusation for numerous California Business & Professions Code violations. Specifically, the California Bureau of Automotive Repair alleged that the Automotive Repair Dealer failed to perform work as contracted, accepted payment in excess of work performed and committed Fraud. The allegations stemmed from a consumer Complaint that led to a sting operation performed by California Bureau of Automotive Repair investigators. The California Bureau of Automotive Repair agreed to a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the Automotive Repair Dealer. The Automotive Repair Dealer was placed on probation.

    In the Matter of the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services Accusation Against Firearms Training Facility, Firearms Training Instructor, Private Patrol Operator and Security Guard: A San Bernardino County client licensed in all of the aforementioned categories received an Accusation for numerous California Business & Professions Code violations. Specifically, the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services alleged that the client rented his PPO License, failed to maintain adequate records, falsely certified three individuals for firearms training and engaged in dishonest conduct. A review of the evidence found that the client was set up by a rival competitor, who made baseless claims against the client. The California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client. The client admitted Renting his PPO License and received two years of disciplinary probation. All other allegations were dismissed.

    In the Matter of the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services Accusation Against Alarm Company Operator: An Alarm Company Operator in Los Angeles faced an Accusation for numerous California Business & Professions Code violations. Specifically, the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services alleged that the Alarm Company Operator operated without a license, employing unregistered Alarm Company Employees, failed to maintain adequate records, committed acts involving fraud and violated the rules and regulations of the California Alarm Company Act. The California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services agreed to a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the Alarm Company Operator whereby several allegations were dismissed. The Alarm Company Operator was placed on probation.

    In the Matter of the California Board of Barbering and Cosmetology Accusation Against Barbershop: The client, a Barbershop in Orange County, received an Accusation from the California Board of Barbering and Cosmetology. The allegations included Employing Unlicensed Barbers, Health Code Violations and Municipal Code Violations. Prior to a Hearing before the Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles, the Board of Barbering and Cosmetology entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client. The barbershop was placed on probation.

    In the Matter of the California Board of Barbering and Cosmetology Accusation Against Barbershop: The client, a Barbershop in Riverside County, received an Accusation from the California Board of Barbering and Cosmetology. The allegations included Employing Unlicensed Barbers, Health Code Violations and Municipal Code Violations. Prior to a Hearing before the Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles, the Board of Barbering and Cosmetology entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the client. The barbershop received a disciplinary order of probation.

  • California Professional License Defense Case Results

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Acccusation Against Contractor: The client, a C-33 Painting Contractor in the Los Angeles area, received an Accusation from the California Contractors State License Board. Five years earlier, the client had been convicted of felony Assault With a Deadly Weapon arising from a Domestic Violence incident in Santa Barbara County. CSLB received evidence of the conviction subsequent to the client being convicted for the felony criminal offense. The matter proceeded to a Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge at the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. A Statute of Limitations argument was raised. The Administrative Law Judge continued the Hearing to a future date. Prior to the continued Hearing, the Attorney General’s Office and CSLB dismissed the Accusation due to the Statute of Limitations having long expired.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Accusation Against Contractor: The client, a B License General Contractor in Los Angeles, received an Accusation from the California Contractors State License Board. The client focused on solar energy projects. Two customers initiated Complaints against the Contractor with CSLB, which resulted in nearly twenty causes for discipline contained in the Accusation. The Contractors State License Board refused to provide a Stipulated Agreement, or settlement, with the client. The matter proceeded to a Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge at the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. CSLB and the Attorney General’s Office sought revocation. The Administrative Law Judge found the client liable for some violations, but dismissed others. The Administrative Law Judge placed the client’s Contractors License on probation.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Accusation Against Contractor: The client, a B License General Contractor in Los Angeles, received an Accusation from the California Contractors State License Board. The Accusation alleged Aiding and Abetting an Unlicensed Contractor, Departure From Accepted Trade Standards, Departure From Plans or Specifications and Home Improvement Form Contract Violations. The allegations stemmed from the client performing poor work quality on beachfront property. The poor work quality resulted in $350,000 damage to the residence after a large storm. CSLB agreed to a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the Contractor. The client was placed on CSLB probation.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Accusation Against Contractor: The client, a B License General Contractor in Los Angeles, received an Accusation from the California Contractors State License Board. The Accusation alleged Accepting an Excessive Deposit, Departure From Accepted Trade Standards, Departure From Plans or Specifications and Home Improvement Form Contract Violations. The Contractor and the homeowners were also engaged in a contentious civil lawsuit in Superior Court. The homeowners alleged poor worksmanship caused nearly $500,000 in damage. A review of the evidence showed that the Contractor did not intentionally cause these issues with the residence. The homeowners also possessed credibility issues. CSLB agreed to a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the Contractor. The client was placed on CSLB probation with no order of Restitution to the homeowners.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Accusation Against Contractor: The client, a B License General Contractor in the Los Angeles area, received an Accusation from the California Contractors State License Board. The Accusation alleged Abandonment of a Project, Departure From Accepted Trade Standards, Accepting Payment Greater than Work Performed and other violations. The dispute occurred due to an uncompleted project. Prior to a Hearing before the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles, CSLB agreed to a Stipulated Agreement (settlement). The client received a Stipulated Agreement for a below disciplinary guideline disciplinary result of two years of disciplinary probation under reduced terms and conditions.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Accusation Against Contractor: A Los Angeles General Contractor faced an Accusation by the California Contractors State License Board. The Accusation occurred due to the client’s Responsible Managing Officer (RMO) receiving numerous consumer Complaints on the RMO’s other licenses. CSLB dismissed the client from the Accusation upon showing that the client did not participate in any of the events leading to the Accusation.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Accusation Against Contractor: A San Diego General Contractor faced an Accusation by the California Contractors State License Board. The Accusation occurred due to the client’s Responsible Managing Officer (RMO) receiving numerous consumer Complaints on the RMO’s other licenses. The client previously failed to respond to the Accusation. CSLB issued a Default Decision and Order against the client. We filed a Petition for Reconsideration on the client’s behalf to Set Aside the Default Decision and Order. CSLB granted the Petition for Reconsideration. CSLB dismissed the client from the Accusation upon showing that the client did not participate in any of the events leading to the Accusation.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Accusation Against Contractor: A San Diego General Contractor (B License) faced an Accusation by the California Contractors State License Board. The Accusation alleged that the client failed to exercise the responsibilities of a Responsible Managing Officer (RMO) and unlawfully rented his license to an individual in Los Angeles. The individual in Los Angeles committed a number of Contractor License Law violations, including Abandonment, Departure From Accepted Trade Standards, Departure From Plans, Exceeding Contract Price and Failure to Maintain Worker’s Compensation Insurance. The B License General Contractor received disciplinary probation under standard terms and conditions.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Accusation Against Contractor: A San Jose General Contractor (B License) faced an Accusation by the California Contractors State License Board due to four project Complaints made by one complainant. The Accusation alleged that the client committed violations including Departure From Accepted Trade Standards, Departure From Plans or Specifications, Failure to Complete Project for Contract Price, Failure to Maintain Workers Compensation Insurance and Home Improvement Form Contract Violations. The B License General Contractor received a below guideline Stipulated Agreement (settlement) of two years of disciplinary probation under standard terms and conditions.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Accusation Against Contractor: A Los Angeles General Contractor (B License) faced an Accusation by the California Contractors State License Board due to mishandling a nearly one million dollar custom home build. The Accusation alleged that the client committed violations including Departure From Accepted Trade Standards, Departure From Plans or Specifications, Failure to Maintain Qualifier Responsibility (Renting a License) and Failure to Obtain a Permit. The B License General Contractor received disciplinary probation under standard terms and conditions.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Accusation Against Contractor: A Los Angeles General Contractor (B License) faced an investigation by the California Contractors State License Board for Abandoning a Job and Departure From Accepted Trade Standards. CSLB filed a disciplinary Accusation alleging that the client committed the aforementioned violations and additional violations. These additional violations included Contracting With Unlicensed Subcontractors, Exceeding the Contract Price, Failure to Maintain Worker’s Compensation Insurance, Home Improvement Contract Form Violations. The B License General Contractor received a below guideline disciplinary order and did not have to pay Restitution to the homeowner.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Accusation Against Contractor: A San Francisco Bay Area and Oakland area General Contractor (B License) faced an Accusation by the California Contractors State License Board due to activities in a declared disaster area. The Accusation alleged that the client committed violations including Departure From Accepted Trade Standards, Departure From Plans or Specifications, Failure to Complete the Project for the Contract Price, Failure to Obtain a Permit and Home Improvement Contract Form Violations. The B License General Contractor received a below disciplinary guideline probationary result.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Accusation Against Contractor: A Los Angeles Area and General Contractor (B License) faced an Accusation by the California Contractors State License Board arising from the construction of a restaurant. The Accusation alleged that the client Contracted With an Unlicensed Contractor and Failed to Maintain Worker’s Compensation Insurance. CSLB previously disciplined the B License General Contractor for the exact same violations, for which the Contractor was placed on probation. Despite the prior disciplinary action, the B License General Contractor received disciplinary probation.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Citation Against Contractor: A Lake Tahoe area General Contractor faced a Citation by the California Contractors State License Board. The Citation occurred due a CSLB Complaint made by a former customer. The matter proceeded to a Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge at the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Sacramento. The Administrative Law Judge dismissed allegations contained in the Citation of Departure From Plans or Specifications and Failure to Pay Subcontractors.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Investigation Against Contractor: A Los Angeles General Contractor faced an investigation by the California Contractors State License Board due to a consumer Complaint. The customer believed that the Contractor Departed From Accepted Trade Standards, Departed From Plans or Specifications and Accepted Payment in Excess of Work Performed. The California Contractors State License Board closed the investigation against the Contractor and referred the consumer to the Civil Court process for redress.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Investigation Against Contractor: A General Contractor working in both Los Angeles and San Jose faced an investigation by the California Contractors State License Board due to a consumer Complaint. The customer alleged a Departure From Accepted Trade Standards, Departure From Plans or Specifications and Elder Abuse. The customer also filed a civil lawsuit against the Contractor in Superior Court. Furthermore, CSLB alleged that the Responsible Managing Officer (RMO) committed Aiding and Abetting an Unlicensed Contractor and Failure to Exercise Qualifier Responsibility. The California Contractors State License Board closed the investigation against the Contractor and referred the consumer to the Civil Court process for redress.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Investigation Against Contractor: A Los Angeles General Contractor faced an investigation by the California Contractors State License Board due to Complaints from subcontractors and the Bond Company. The subcontractors and Bond Company alleged nonpayment of funds. After payment of the funds, the CSLB closed the investigation against the Contractor.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Investigation Against Contractor: A Santa Rosa General Contractor (B License) faced an investigation by the California Contractors State License Board due to a Complaint from a customer of the General Contractor. The customer used the CSLB Complaint and disciplinary process as leverage for a Civil lawsuit. After a review of the evidence, CSLB closed the Complaint against the Contractor.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Investigation Against Contractor: A Los Angeles General Contractor (B License) faced an investigation by the California Contractors State License Board due to a Complaint from a customer of the General Contractor. The customer used the CSLB Complaint and disciplinary process as leverage for a Civil lawsuit. After a review of the evidence, CSLB closed the Complaint against the Contractor.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Investigation Against Contractor: A San Jose General Contractor (B License) faced an investigation by CSLB due to a Complaint from a customer of the General Contractor. After a review of the evidence, the Contractors State License Board closed the Complaint against the Contractor.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Judgment Suspension Against Contractor: The client, an Orange County General Contractor (B License), received a notice of license suspension. The notice arose due to a civil court judgment against a licensed company for which the Contractor previously served a Responsible Managing Officer (RMO). The Contractor declared bankruptcy, but CSLB refused to lift the judgment suspension because the judgment was still valid against the other licensed company (for which the Contractor previously served as RMO). A legal brief was prepared and submitted to CSLB and the California Department of Consumer Affairs Legal Division. The Contractors State License Board then lifted the notice of judgment suspension against the Contractor.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Judgment Suspension Against Contractor: The client, a Los Angeles General Contractor (B License), received a notice of license suspension. The notice arose due to a civil court judgment from an insurance company against the Contractor for a significant amount of money. A civil litigation attorney negotiated the judgment with the insurance company on behalf the Contractor client. Once a Satisfaction of Judgment was filed with the Superior Court, a petition to remove the judgment suspension was filed with the Contractors State License Board. CSLB lifted the suspension against the Contractor.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Contractor License Applicant: The California Contractors State License Board denied the prospective Contractor a C-36 Plumbing License due to a felony conviction for Second Degree Murder. The applicant spent twenty five years in prison. While in prison, the applicant rehabilitated himself. Upon release from custody, the applicant found work in construction. Over a seven year period, the applicant worked his way up from the bottom. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge at the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. The Administrative Law Judge granted the prospective Contractor a probationary Contractor License.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Contractor License Applicant: The California Contractors State License Board denied the prospective Contractor a C-36 Plumbing License due to five felony convictions. The felony convictions were for Assault With a Deadly Weapon, Grand Theft, Possession for Sale of Narcotics and Possession of a Controlled Substance. The most recent conviction occurred three years prior to the submission of the application. The prospective Contractor participated in extensive substance abuse rehabilitation for drug addiction, became sober and engaged in community service. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge at the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. The Administrative Law Judge granted the prospective Contractor a probationary Contractor License.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Contractor License Applicant: The California Contractors State License Board denied the prospective Contractor a C-36 Plumbing License due to eight felony convictions. The felony convictions involving Manufacturing Controlled Substances, Identity Theft and Fraud. The client spent a significant amount of time in prison and on probation and parole. The prospective Contractor participated in extensive substance abuse rehabilitation for drug addiction, became sober and maintained stable employment. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge at the California Office of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. The Administrative Law Judge granted the prospective Contractor a Contractors License with disciplinary probation.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Accusation Against Home Improvement Salesperson: A Los Angeles Home Improvement Salesperson faced an Accusation by the California Contractors State License Board. The allegations included Departure From Accepted Trade Standards, Elder Abuse, Failure to Pull Permits and Willful and Fraudulent Acts in two separate Complaints. The Home Improvement Salesperson allegedly fabricated the extent of repairs necessary to the elderly homeowners. One of the elderly homeowners was coerced into signing up for a high interest credit card to finance the project. A review of the facts revealed numerous evidentiary issues for CSLB. CSLB agreed to a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) of probation for the Home Improvement Salesperson. The Home Improvement Salesperson was placed on CSLB probation.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Accusation Against Home Improvement Salesperson: The client, a Registered Home Improvement Salesperson in Los Angeles, received an Accusation from the California Contractors State License Board. The Accusation alleged Contracting Without a License, Fraudulent Use of a Contractor’s License, Failure to Maintain Worker’s Compensation Insurance, Departure From Accepted Trade Standards, Accepting an Excessive Deposit and Home Improvement Form Contract Violations. The allegations stemmed from the client failing to inform his Contractor of a job that he procured. The client was additionally convicted of misdemeanor Contracting Without a License in Criminal Court. CSLB agreed to a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the Home Improvement Salesperson. The client was placed on CSLB probation.

    In the Matter of the California Contractors State License Board Petition to Revoke Probation Against Home Improvement Salesperson: A Los Angeles Home Improvement Salesperson allegedly failed to comply with the terms and conditions of his California Contractors State License Board Probation. CSLB revoked the Home Improvement Salesperson’s probation and issued an Order of Revocation of his Home Improvement Salesperson Registration. We filed a Petition for Reconsideration to Set Aside the Order of Revocation. CSLB agreed with the arguments set forth in the Petition for Reconsideration. CSLB reinstated the Home Improvement Salesperson’s Registration under the original terms and conditions of CSLB probation.

    In the Matter of the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing Accusation Against High School Teacher: A San Diego High School English Teacher faced an Accusation by the California CTC after a termination proceeding by the School District. The Accusation alleged that the client committed over a dozen disciplinary violations over a two year period. The alleged violations included academic dishonesty, failure to maintain student confidentiality, failure to supervise students, insubordination to school administrators, moral turpitude and numerous allegations of retaliation against students. The matter was scheduled for a Settlement Conference and Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge at the Office of Administrative Hearings in San Diego. At the Settlement Conference, the Commission on Teacher Credentialing realized the weakness of some of the evidence against the client and understood the impact that this Teacher made on a number of former students. The CTC agreed to a Consent Agreement with the client that placed the client on probation, with a short suspension.

    In the Matter of the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing Investigation Against High School Teacher: A Los Angeles Charter School High School Teacher faced a Complaint Investigation from the CTC. A student reported that the Teacher committed Sexual Battery and Sexual Harassment against her. In its response to CTC, the defense noted that the student made the report after being disciplined by the Teacher. The student’s Complaint consisted of numerous departures from her story. The Commission on Teacher Credentialing closed the the Complaint Investigation and no disciplinary action was taken against the Teacher.

    In the Matter of the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing Investigation Against Middle School Teacher: A Los Angeles Middle School Music Teacher faced a Complaint Investigation from the CTC. The School District received a report of sexual misconduct from a student against the Teacher. The School District initiated a termination proceeding and referred the matter to the Commission on Teacher Credentialing. The CTC’s Investigative Report contained a number of inconsistencies. The student made the report months after the alleged incident, in response to disciplinary action against the student by the Teacher. The student’s Complaint itself contained numerous inconsistencies and falsehoods. The CTC closed the Complaint Investigation and no disciplinary action was taken against the Teacher.

    In the Matter of the California Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors and Geologists Accusation Against Land Surveyor: The client, a Los Angeles Land Surveyor, received a disciplinary Accusation from the BPELSG. The Accusation alleged Negligence in the Practice of Land Surveying, Incompetence in the Practice of Land Surveying and Contract Violations. The allegations stemmed from a project where the Land Surveyor allegedly produced deficient maps, which allegedly caused construction issues for the Land Surveyor’s client. Due to extensive defense evidence presented to the Board and to the Attorney General’s Office, the Board agreed to a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the Land Surveyor for a Public Reproval.

    In the Matter of the California Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors and Geologists Accusation Against Land Surveyor: The client was a Land Surveyor licensed in both California and Texas. The Land Surveyor received several Complaints from trade organizations in Los Angeles and Riverside County due to faulty surveys and improperly filed Records of Survey. The California BPELSG filed a disciplinary Accusation against the Land Surveyor. Due to extensive mitigation evidence presented to the Board and to the Attorney General’s Office, the Board agreed to a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the Land Surveyor. The Land Surveyor was placed on probation with several modifications to allow for probation to be completed outside of California.

    In the Matter of the California Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors and Geologists Accusation Against Land Surveyor: The client, a San Diego Land Surveyor, received an Accusation. The Accusation spanned four consumer Complaints and amounted to 34 alleged violations. The BPELSG refused to enter into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the Land Surveyor. The BPELSG demanded the client surrender his Land Surveyor License. The matter proceeded to Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the California Office of Administrative Hearings in San Diego. At Hearing, the Administrative Law Judge dismissed nearly half of the alleged violations. The client demonstrated that he was not a danger to the public as a Registered Nurse. The Administrative Law Judge granted the Land Surveyor BPELSG probation.

    In the Matter of the California Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors and Geologists Petition to Revoke Probation Against Land Surveyor: The client was a Land Surveyor licensed in both California and Texas. The Land Surveyor previously received a disciplinary Accusation that resulted in disciplinary probation. The Land Surveyor failed to complete there terms and conditions of his disciplinary probation. The California BPELSG filed a Petition to Revoke Probation.Due to extensive mitigation evidence presented to the Board and to the Attorney General’s Office, the Board agreed to a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the Land Surveyor to extend probation to complete the required terms and conditions.

    In the Matter of the California Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors and Geologists Accusation Against Civil Engineer: The client, a Los Angeles Civil Engineer, received an Accusation. The Accusation spanned six consumer Complaints and amounted to over 30 alleged violations. The client presented significant evidence of personal issues during the time of the violations. Furthermore, the client presented numerous corrective measures to make his business fully compliant with the law. The Civil Engineer entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the California Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors and Geologists. The client received BPELSG probation.

    In the Matter of the California Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors and Geologists Accusation Against Civil Engineer: The client, an out of state Civil Engineer licensed in California, received an Accusation. The Accusation alleged Incompetence in the Practice of Engineering, Negligence in the Practice of Engineering and several other violations. The disciplinary Accusation arose from a dispute between the Civil Engineer and his client, which caused significant financial harm to the client. Due to significant mitigation, the BPELSG entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the Civil Engineer for a disciplinary result of probation with no restitution ordered.

    In the Matter of the California Architects Board Accusation Against Architect: The client, an out of state Architect from New York but licensed in California, received an Accusation. The Accusation stemmed from the Architect receiving a federal felony conviction for Embezzlement From an Employee Pension Fund in New York. The Architect was convicted of embezzling over $125,000 from the employee pension fund of her family’s architecture firm.The matter was set for a Hearing before the Office of Administrative Hearings in San Diego. Prior to the Hearing, due to significant mitigation, the California Architects Board entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the Architect for a disciplinary result of probation and a 90 day license suspension.

    In the Matter of the California Structural Pest Control Board Accusation Against Pest Control Operator: The client, a Pest Control Operator in Los Angeles, received an Accusation from the California Structural Pest Control Board. The Accusation alleged Aiding and Abetting Unlicensed Pest Control, Employing Unregistered Workers, Failure to Issue a Completion Notice, Failure to Maintain Records, Fraud, Gross Negligence and Negligent Handling of Poisonous Exterminating Agents. The allegations stemmed from the client mismanaging two projects. SPCB agreed to a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the Pest Control Operator whereby the client was placed on disciplinary probation.

    In the Matter of the California Structural Pest Control Board Accusation Against Pest Control Operator: The client, a Pest Control Operator in San Diego, received an Accusation from the California Structural Pest Control Board. Nine years earlier, the client had been convicted of a felony sex offense. SPCB wanted to revoke the client’s Pest Control Operator License. However, the client showed substantial evidence of mitigation and rehabilitation. The Structural Pest Control Board agreed to a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the Pest Control Operator. The Pest Control Operator was placed on three years of disciplinary probation with standard terms and conditions.

    In the Matter of the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services Disciplinary Review Hearing of Alarm Company Employee: The client was an Alarm Company Employee for a major commercial Alarm Company in Los Angeles. The client had been convicted of misdemeanor Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (DUI) and felony Child Endangerment. Police arrested the client for DUI while she had several children in the car. As a result of the felony conviction, the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services immediately suspended the client’s Alarm Company Employee Registration. BSIS held an informal Disciplinary Review Hearing in Riverside to determine whether the Alarm Company Employee Registration should remain suspended or restored to active status. After the Disciplinary Review Hearing, BSIS restored the client’s Alarm Company Employee Registration to active status.

    In the Matter of the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services Disciplinary Review Hearing of Security Guard: The client was a Security Guard Manager for a large Private Patrol Operator in Los Angeles. The client had been convicted of felony Stalking. As a result of the felony conviction, BSIS immediately suspended the client’s Guard Card. BSIS held an informal Disciplinary Review Hearing in Riverside to determine whether the Guard Card should remain suspended or restored to active status. After the Disciplinary Review Hearing, BSIS restored the client’s Guard Card to active status.

    In the Matter of the Court Reporters Board of California Statement of Issues (License Denial) Against Court Reporter License Applicant: The client, a prospective Court Reporter Applicant from Las Nevada, was denied a Court Reporters License in California. The client, a Court Reporter in Nevada, was denied licensure in California due to prior discipline in Nevada. The prior discipline occurred because the prospective Court Reporter failed to timely file transcripts while working as a Court Reporter in Nevada. The prospective Court Reporter entered into a Stipulated Agreement (settlement) with the Court Reporters Board of California. The client received Court Reporters Board of California probation.