A Gamble With Trust Funds
The December 2016 California Bar Journal has its usual array of bar discipline summaries
WILLIAM ANDRAI ACOSTA [#207377], 44, of Glendora, was suspended from the practice of law for 60 days and ordered to take the MPRE. He was also placed on two years’ probation and faces a two-year suspension if he fails to comply with the terms of his disciplinary probation. The order took effect July 23, 2016.
A State Bar Court judge found Acosta culpable of failing to maintain client funds in his trust account and misappropriating client funds which resulted from his gambling hobby. Acosta, who frequently goes to Las Vegas and stays at The Mirage, set up a marker account at the hotel and casino. A marker represents a player’s legal obligation to pay for chips. Although Acosta’s casino account was initially linked to his personal bank accounts, at some point it was deactivated because the bank accounts were no longer valid. Acosta then gave the casino three new bank accounts to link, one of which was his client trust account.
When he gambled at The Mirage in November and December 2013 Acosta obtained $10,000 worth of chips, but did not pay the markers before leaving. Unable to reach him, the casino tried multiple times to have the money deducted from his client trust account but there were insufficient funds. The casino successfully collected the money after Acosta deposited a client’s settlement check into the account. As a result, the amount in his client trust account fell to $1,028.82, which was significantly less than the $5,267 that he was supposed to hold in trust for his client and her medical provider.
Unaware the casino deducted the money, Acosta wrote a $3,000 check to the client from his trust account, which was not paid due to insufficient funds. When he learned what had occurred, he wrote the client a new check, which was paid.
Acosta had no prior record of discipline, presented 20 witnesses who testified to his good character and cooperated with the State Bar.
Thank you for the comment that alerted us to a recent stipulation in a disciplinary case that involved drunk driving and this
On the night of September 29, 2012, respondent was driving home with his wife, Ms. X, when the couple got into an argument. At some point during the argument, Ms. X called 911, reporting that respondent had hit her and that he had been drinking.
Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Deputies responded to respondent’s residence. Upon arrival, they found respondent outside the house. The deputies observed scratches to respondent’s cheek and forearm, from being struck by Ms. X, and that respondent’s breath smelled of alcohol. Respondent declined to speak with the deputies and declined medical attention. The deputies detained respondent, placing him the back seat of a patrol car, while they conducted their investigation.
Ms. X was also outside, and was crying. The deputies observed some swelling and small lacerations to her lips, and that her breath smelled of alcohol. She refused medical attention and declined to obtain an Emergency Protective Order against respondent. She then refused to cooperate any further with the deputies.
While respondent was handcuffed and seated in the back of a patrol car, he began to complain of difficulty breathing. A Fire Department medical unit was summoned to attend to respondent. While a fire fighter was attending respondent, respondent spat in the fire fighter’s face without any warning or provocation.
The stipulation is for a suspension with all but 120 days stayed. (Mike Frisch)