The ethical duty of a disciplined attorney does not end with the sanction—it begins with mandatory compliance. Attorney Alexander Scott Jester (State Bar Number 291145), formerly of Fawnskin and Costa Mesa, has faced a severe consequence for his continued defiance: a minimum two-year actual suspension of his law license.
This extensive penalty, effective September 28, 2025, was imposed by the California Supreme Court because Jester repeatedly violated his disciplinary probation and, crucially, failed to comply with the essential public protection measure known as Rule 9.20.
The Core Misconduct: Disregard for the Rules
Jester’s current two-year suspension is the result of compounding his prior misconduct with a wholesale rejection of the disciplinary process itself.
1. Chronic Failure to Comply with Probation
Jester had previously been disciplined (in December 2021) with a one-year actual suspension for professional misconduct including:
-
Failure to Perform Competently
-
Failure to Communicate with clients
-
Failure to Refund Unearned Fees
The current, more severe discipline was triggered because he failed to comply with the terms attached to that earlier probation, demonstrating a persistent lack of rehabilitation and commitment to ethical practice.
2. The Fatal Violation: Ignoring Rule 9.20
The most critical violation was his failure to comply with California Rules of Court, rule 9.20. This rule requires any suspended attorney to file a sworn affidavit with the State Bar Court, certifying that they have formally notified all clients, opposing counsel, and courts of their suspension.
-
Public Protection: Rule 9.20 is a vital public protection mechanism designed to ensure clients are not abandoned.
-
The Consequence: The State Bar views a failure to comply with this affidavit as a grave act of non-cooperation and a breach of duty to the public, which, when coupled with a prior disciplinary record, warrants the harshest sanctions.
The Sanction: Lengthy and Conditional Removal
The discipline is extensive and places the burden of proof for reinstatement entirely on Jester:
-
Minimum Two-Year Actual Suspension: Jester is banned from practicing law for at least 24 months.
-
Probation: He was placed on two years of probation following the suspension.
-
Conditional Reinstatement: His suspension will extend indefinitely beyond the two-year minimum until he provides affirmative proof that he has fully complied with all conditions, including any prior restitution orders and demonstrating his fitness to practice law.
Conclusion: Compliance is the Key to Retention
The severe, minimum two-year suspension of Alexander Scott Jester serves as a forceful reminder that the State Bar views an attorney’s failure to obey disciplinary orders with the utmost seriousness.
When an attorney accumulates a history of client neglect and then actively ignores the rules designed to protect the public from that neglect (like Rule 9.20), the consequence is a substantial, indefinite loss of the privilege to practice. For Jester, the path back to the Bar is now long, expensive, and wholly dependent on his demonstrated, unwavering compliance.
