In summary of your letter, you received my complaint against Dear Lawyer on March 08, 2006, and a staff attorney reviewed it to determine whether Dear Lawyer violated the State Bar Act and/or the Rules of Professional Conduct. After a “careful review,” and after, “taking into consideration all relevant factors,” the State Bar concluded that, “the matter doesn’t warrant action” because you lack “sufficient evidence of willful or intentional misconduct by Dear Lawyer to bring disciplinary charges against Dear Lawyer.” 

With all due respect, I am having a difficult time understanding how you reached this decision. What is unacceptable to me is while the State Bar necessitates such standards of honesty and loyalty from Members, your appraisal of these matters is reprehensible.  I am sorry to be blunt about it, but I feel as though I ought to.  This is not to say I dishonor your discretion. It’s just that you have not paid attention to the problems and instances of misconduct by Dear Lawyer that I tried to painfully write and describe in the nineteen-page, written complaint that I sent to the State Bar on March 06, 2006, including the 43 pounds of “supplemental litigation documents” that your office “perused.”   

Perhaps my own communication deficiencies (in that I have Dyslexia) are to blame for your oversights and imprudence to these matters. What I hope for you to understand is the amount of information I communicated and articulated to you covered approximately a span of 31-months. In consideration of that, as well as the exhaustion and fatigue that spiraled from litigation including Dear Lawyer's unforeseen betrayal has only been aggravation to my dyslexia. Thus said, if my complaint contained transposed letters, words, numbers etc, I sincerely apologize for any inconvenience that my learning disability may have imposed on you during your initial review of these matters.

Although you “sympathize for me and my situation” as you stated in your letter, I am sorry, but I don’t want your sympathy, I don’t want your pity, and I surely don’t want to arbitrate for any lost money. All I want is for you to do your job and do what is right. I told you once, and I will tell you again, these matters are of urgent importance. 

 As a direct result of Dear Lawyer's incompetence, neglect, dishonesty, and misconduct, he caused me more harm than good. I can honestly tell you this is no kind of life to live. What happened to me should not happen to anyone ever again. Without the State Bar’s help, however, I won’t be the last. If he did it once, he will do it again. At this point, there is nothing more that I can do to help protect Dear Lawyer's present and future clients than this, but you can!

Furthermore, I am requesting a formal review of my complaint against Dear Lawye and your reconsideration to open and investigate it for any disciplinary recourse that the State Bar Court, the California State Supreme Court, and the United States Supreme Court would deem proper and necessary.

In brief of these matters, you may wish to refer to the March 06, 2006 written complaint, the supplemental litigation documents (EXHIBITS: A-Z), all footnotes, endnotes, margin commentaries, and timelines, including a summary outline that begins on the next page.

(Page 1 of 17)