Simmons

This is a proceeding to review a recommendation of Disciplinary Board I of the State Bar of California that petitioner be suspended from the practice of law for two years (one year actual and the balance on probation). 1

Questions: First. Is the conclusion reasonably warranted that petitioner misappropriated funds of his clients ?

Yes. The burden is upon one seeking a review of a recommendation of a disciplinary board to show that its findings are not supported by the evidence or that its recommendation is erroneous or unlawful. (Marlowe v. State Bar, 63 Cal.2d 304, 309 [8] [ 46 Cal.Rptr. 326 , 405 P.2d 150 ]; Scofield v. State Bar, 62 Cal.2d 624, 625 . [2] [ 43 Cal.Rptr. 825 , 401 P.2d 217 ] ; McKinney v. State Bar, 62 Cal.2d 194, 195 [2] [ 41 Cal.Rptr. 665 , 397 P.2d 425 ].) The record discloses, however, that petitioner has not sustained this burden.

It appears from the record that before his admission to practice law petitioner worked as a law clerk for his brother, Herbert W. Simmons, Jr. After being admitted to practice, he *283 continued to work for his brother as a salaried attorney, at first for $100, and later for $150, a week.

Petitioner’s brother “named” the law…