Mayo

We review, and approve, the recommendation of the majority of the Disciplinary Board of the State Bar (board) that petitioner Mike Mayo should be suspended from the practice of law for four months.

Petitioner was admitted to practice in January 1953 and has had no prior disciplinary record. After a lengthy hearing, the board found that petitioner had represented a client in the probate administration of his client’s deceased sister’s estate without disclosing either to the client or to the probate court that petitioner owed money to the estate, representing funds borrowed by petitioner from the deceased during her lifetime. *74 Petitioner’s sole contention is that the evidence presented to the board was insufficient to support its conclusion that he had borrowed the money.

Our function in State Bar disciplinary proceedings is well established. We make independent findings of fact on review of the entire record and exercise an independent judgment as to the discipline to be imposed. (See Brotsky v. State Bar (1962) 57 Cal.2d 287, 301 [ 19 Cal.Rptr. 153 , 368 P.2d 697 , 94 A.L.R.2d 1310 ].) Our review of the record in the present case indicates that there was ample…