News Center

State Bar of California Releases Results of External Investigation into Former Deputy Executive Director Robert Hawley’s Practices of Authoring Rule 2201 Reports

The State Bar of California today released a report from an external investigation into former Deputy Executive Director Robert (Bob) Hawley’s “ghostwriting” of reports in connection with the Rule 2201 Program during the 2010 to 2015 period. Part of the State Bar Rules of Procedure, the Rule 2201 Program refers attorney discipline cases to outside Special Deputy Trial Counsel (SDTC) when the Office of Chief Trial Counsel (OCTC) has conflicts.  

Hawley’s authoring of Rule 2201 Program reports on behalf of SDTCs was brought to the State Bar’s attention through the Halpern May report, released in March 2023. In that report, which focused on the State Bar’s handling of past disciplinary complaints against now disbarred Thomas V. Girardi, Hawley admitted to writing one such case report related to Girardi, as well as reports for other cases handled by SDTCs. In response, the Board of Trustees directed an external investigation of Hawley’s practices of authoring Rule 2201 reports, which was conducted by Adam Kamenstein, a former federal prosecutor now with the law firm Adams, Duerk & Kamenstein (ADK).  

The ADK investigation found that of the 11 Rule 2201 Program reports between 2010 and 2015, Hawley more likely than not ghostwrote 7 reports for outside SDTCs, including the one ghostwritten case involving Girardi discussed in the Halpern May report. Of the remaining four reports, Hawley appeared to have had no involvement in three and limited involvement in editing the fourth. These 11 Rule 2201 Program cases—plus two more that did not result in written reports—were administered by Hawley because the then Chief Trial Counsel (CTC) had a conflict and was recused. The cases administered by Hawley comprised a small subset of all Rule 2201 Program cases.  

The ADK report further found that the version of Rule 2201 in effect at that time contained considerable ambiguity regarding the type of assistance designated State Bar staff could provide to SDTCs. Because of that ambiguity (which was removed from the rule in 2016), investigators were precluded from finding that Hawley’s substantive assistance to SDTCs constituted a direct violation of the Rule 2201. However, the investigators found that Hawley’s actions violated the spirit and undermined the purpose of the Rule 2201 Program.  

The ADK report also found that there was insufficient evidence to substantiate a finding that any member of the State Bar’s leadership, other than the former general counsel, had knowledge of Hawley’s authoring or editing of Rule 2201 Program reports before the Halpern May investigation began in 2021.  

“While it is troubling that the ADK report confirmed Hawley ghostwrote Rule 2201 reports, the Rule 2201 Program is completely transformed from the one that existed during Hawley’s time at the State Bar,” said Board Chair Brandon Stallings. “With an amended rule, dedicated Rule 2201 Program administrator, and a panel of paid Special Deputy Trial Counsel, ghostwriting of Rule 2201 reports by State Bar staff could not and would not happen today.”   

The current Rule 2201 Program is part of the State Bar’s concerted and significant reform efforts highlighted in the Five Years of Reform. 

Independent of the ADK investigation, the case files for the reports having indicia of ghostwriting were reviewed by the State Bar’s external auditors. Case No. 2 in the ADK report was previously audited by Alyse Lazar because it involved Girardi as a respondent. As detailed in Lazar’s publicly released audit report, that case (referred to as Case No. 90 in the audit) should have been investigated, and a warning letter should have been issued. The external auditors did not find any basis to recommend that any of the remaining six cases be reopened.   

Some names in the report have been anonymized to comply with privacy laws. The ADK report has been provided to Ms. Laguna as the Rule 2201 administrator for consideration of whether any disciplinary investigations should be opened based on the report’s findings.  

###

Follow the State Bar online
LinkedIn, X (Twitter), Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube

The State Bar of California's mission is to protect the public and includes the primary functions of licensing, regulation and discipline of attorneys; the advancement of the ethical and competent practice of law; and support of efforts for greater access to, and inclusion in, the legal system.