SAN FRANCISCO – Sacramento attorney William Buckner Menn II faces disbarment by default following a recently announced California State Bar Court recommendation regarding seven counts of misconduct involving a single client matter.
Menn is alleged to have not attended a hearing where judgment and sentence were to be entered, according to the eight-page decision and order of involuntary inactive enrollment issued Jan. 3 by the state bar court. He also allegedly didn't attend a hearing to show cause about why he should not be held in contempt, according to the decision.
Menn is alleged to have violated professional conduct rules, including those regarding improper withdrawal, refunding unearned fees, rendering appropriate accounts to a client, responding to status inquires and cooperating in a disciplinary investigation.
Menn failed to participate in person or via counsel, and the state bar's decision and order for disbarment was entered by default. In such cases, in which an attorney fails to participate in state bar disciplinary proceedings 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 July.
The state bar court's recommendation included an involuntary inactive enrollment order that rendered Menn 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.
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.
Menn's recommended discipline was among the recent dispositions filed the state bar court's hearing department for January.
Menn was admitted to the bar in California on July 26, 2007, according to his profile at the state bar website.
Menn has no prior discipline before the state bar, there are no other investigations or disciplinary matters pending against him and the client security fund has paid no claims resulting from his alleged misconduct, according to the decision.