December 24, 2025

Immigration Attorney Rodney Alan Malpert Placed on Probation Following Misdemeanor Conviction

Immigration Attorney Rodney Alan Malpert Placed on Probation Following Misdemeanor Conviction

Even the most distinguished legal careers can be subject to professional discipline when personal conduct runs afoul of the law. Rodney Alan Malpert (State Bar Number 133812), a widely respected figure in business immigration law and a former partner at the global firm Fragomen, has been placed on professional probation by the California Supreme Court, effective August 8, 2025.

The disciplinary action (Case No. 24-C-30618) stems from a criminal conviction related to a 2017 domestic incident, which the State Bar Court determined constituted “misconduct warranting discipline.”

 The Core Violation: A Christmas Day Incident Leading to Misdemeanor Conviction

The disciplinary proceedings followed a long-running legal matter that originated from a domestic incident on Christmas Day, 2017:

  • The Incident: Following a verbal argument that escalated from a restaurant to his home, Malpert engaged in a physical altercation with his spouse. The incident was witnessed by their minor child and led to emergency protective orders.

  • Criminal Charges: After initial felony charges, the matter was later amended. On May 6, 2024, Malpert pleaded no contest to two misdemeanor counts: Assault (Cal. Penal Code 240) and Disturbing the Peace.

  • Sentencing: He received a sentence of four days in county jail, was ordered to pay restitution, and was issued a 10-year no-contact criminal protective order.

  • Finding of Misconduct: The State Bar Court concluded that while the convictions did not involve “moral turpitude” (intentional dishonesty or fraud), they did involve misconduct warranting discipline, as they reflected a failure to uphold the standards of character and respect for the law required of an attorney.

🏛️ The Sanction: Stayed Suspension and Probation

Given Malpert’s long, unblemished career and cooperation, the California Supreme Court adopted the recommendation of the State Bar Court, opting for a rehabilitative approach:

  • Stayed Suspension: Malpert received a one-year suspension from the practice of law, but the execution of that suspension was stayed. This means he was not actually removed from practice, provided he complies with the probation terms.

  • One-Year Probation: He was placed on one year of professional probation, effective August 8, 2025.

  • Probation Conditions: During this period, he must comply with several strict requirements, including:

    • Passing the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination (MPRE).

    • Completing an e-learning course on professional conduct.

    • Meeting regularly with the State Bar’s Office of Case Management and Supervision.

  • Mitigating Factors: The court heavily considered Malpert’s nearly 30 years of discipline-free practice and his full cooperation with the State Bar by entering a pretrial stipulation.

 A Career of High Distinction

Prior to these legal challenges, Rodney Malpert was widely regarded as a preeminent authority in immigration law:

  • Career Heights: He served as a partner at Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy, the world’s largest immigration law firm, and was previously senior counsel for Texas Instruments.

  • Academic Contributions: A graduate of Cornell Law School, he authored major treatises on business immigration and taught the subject at Arizona State University.

  • Current Status: Public records indicate Malpert is currently listed as “Inactive” in California, Arizona, and Texas, and has recently retired from active legal practice.

 Conclusion: The Requirement of Personal Integrity

The case of Rodney Alan Malpert serves as a potent reminder that the State Bar’s oversight extends to an attorney’s personal conduct, particularly in matters involving criminal convictions and public safety. Even a storied career with three decades of professional accolades does not exempt a practitioner from the ethical requirement to maintain a standard of conduct that preserves public confidence in the legal profession.

Independent Journalism Needs You

You just read something most publications won't touch. We investigate judges who shouldn't be on the bench, attorneys who prey on clients, and a legal system that too often protects itself instead of the public. We do it openly, aggressively, and without apology.

We don't have a paywall. We don't take money from law firms, bar associations, or corporate advertisers who might prefer we stay quiet. Every piece of reporting on this site — every judge exposed, every disbarment documented, every reversal analyzed — was made possible entirely by readers like you.

If you read us regularly — if this work has ever made you angry, informed you, or helped you — we humbly ask you to support us today. It takes less than a minute. Even $1 goes directly toward keeping this reporting alive. Without it, we cannot continue.

Reader Supported

This journalism is free because readers like you make it possible.

We don't have corporate advertisers. We don't take money from law firms. Every investigation you read here is funded entirely by readers. Even $1 keeps us going.

Join 47 readers who donated this month

47% toward our monthly goal of 100 supporters

Secure checkout via Stripe. Cancel your monthly gift anytime.

The Ethics Reporter is independent and reader-funded. We have no corporate backers. Your support is everything.