SAN FRANCISCO — Los Angeles attorney Kyle Sheldon Hackett faces possible disbarment by default following a recently announced California State Bar Court recommendation over four counts of misconduct in a single client matter.
Hackett allegedly failed to inform his client that the Los Angeles Superior Court dismissed a lawsuit because Hackett didn't respond to discovery or oppose dispositive motions, according to the eight-page decision and order of involuntary inactive enrollment issued Jan. 3 by the state bar court. Hackett also allegedly disobeyed a court order that directed him to pay $1,650 in discovery sanctions, according to the decision.
Hackett failed to participate in person or via counsel and state bar's decision and order for disbarment was entered by default. In such cases, in which an attorney fails to participate in a State Bar of California disciplinary proceeding despite adequate notice and opportunity, the bar invokes Rule 5.85, which provides the procedure for the state bar to recommend an attorney's disbarment.
The state bar's entry for default was entered in May.
The state bar's recommendation is pending final action by the California Supreme Court, an appeal before the state bar's review department or expiration of time in which parties may request further review within the state bar court.
Other disciplinary matters were pending against Hackett, according to the decision.
The state bar court's recommendation included an involuntary inactive enrollment order that rendered Hackett involuntarily enrolled as an inactive member of the State Bar of California. That order was effective three calendar days after service, according to the recommendation.
Hackett's recommended discipline was among the dispositions filed earlier this month by the state bar court's hearing department for January.
Hackett was admitted to the bar in California on March 30, 1998, according to his profile at the state bar website.
In a previous discipline, Hackett was placed on two years' probation in October 2016 after he stipulated to having entered into an agreement for contingency fee in a medical malpractice case that was higher than legally allowable, according to information on his state bar profile.
In a earlier discipline, Hackett was publicly reproved in March 2007 after he stipulated to four ethical violations in a single client matter, according to the decision.