George Jan Paukert is an active member of the California Bar and was admitted 11th June 1996. George graduated from University of West Los Angeles.
Lawyer Information
| Name | George Jan Paukert |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 11 June 1996 (28 years, 6 months ago) |
| Status | Active |
| Bar Number | 183124 |
Contact
| Phone Number | 310-826-0180 |
|---|
Schools
| Law School | University of West Los Angeles (Los Angeles CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | University of British Columbia (Canada) |
Address
| Current Address | 8584 Alpine Vineyards Ct Las Vegas, NV 89139-6818 |
|---|---|
| Map | |
| Previous Address | 737 S Windsor Blvd #304 Los Angeles, CA 90005 |
| Previous Address | 44376 Hazel Canyon Ln Palm Desert, CA 92260-3054 |
History
| 8 June 2009 | Active (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|---|---|
| 9 May 2009 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (15 years, 7 months ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 06-O-13239 |
| 10 June 2008 | Disciplinary charges filed in State Bar Court 06-O-13239 (16 years, 6 months ago) |
| 11 June 1996 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (28 years, 6 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
May 9, 2009 GEORGE J. PAUKERT [#183124], 58, of Los Angeles was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on one year of probation with an actual 30-day suspension and was ordered to take the MPRE. The order took effect May 9, 2009. Paukert stipulated to three acts of misconduct stemming from the actions of his law office manager, Dae Won Kim. Throughout 2004, Paukert traveled frequently to Canada to care for his dying father and later to handle the father’s estate after his death. He did not have in place any procedures to ensure that his client trust account was handled properly or to alert him of any unauthorized activities.During Paukert’s absence, five checks were written against insufficient funds in his trust account, totaling about $19,000 and 14 checks were cashed at a local liquor store and then refused by Paukert’s bank. When Paukert discovered the losses, he did not report Kim to law enforcement, nor did he resolve the issue with the liquor store.The liquor store representative sued Paukert and filed a complaint with the State Bar. Paukert said he was negotiating with the liquor store and the complaint would be withdrawn if he could reach a satisfactory financial settlement. Eventually, the store owner withdrew his bar complaint and dismissed Paukert from his civil suit as a condition of the settlement.Paukert stipulated that he failed to perform legal services competently by not properly supervising an employee, he failed to properly maintain his client trust account, and he improperly entered into an agreement with the liquor store owner to withdraw his complaint in order to settle a civil matter.In mitigation, he cooperated with the bar’s investigation, his father died and Paukert was involved with settling his estate at the time of the misconduct, and he demonstrated his good character. |