ANNOTATIONSSource:
Amended and adopted June 25, 1998, effective January 1, 1999.
Editor's note:
This rule was previously numbered as
241.6.
I.General Consideration.
II.Grounds.
A.In General.
B.Violation of Code of Professional Responsibility.
C.Violation of Legal Ethics.
D.Violation of Honesty, Justice, or Morality.
E.Gross Negligence.
F.Criminal Behavior.
G.Violation of Other Rules.
H.Failure to Respond to Grievance Committee.
I.GENERAL CONSIDERATION.
Law reviews.
For article, "The Perjurious Defendant: A Proposed Solution to the Defense
Lawyer's Conflicting Ethical Obligations to the Court and to His Client",
see 59 Den. L.J. 75 (1981).
For Article, "Incriminating Evidence: What to do With a Hot Potato", see
11 Colo. Law. 880 (1982).
For article, "The Search for Truth Continued: More Disclosure, Less
Privilege", see 54 U. Colo. L. Rev. 51 (1982).
For article, "The Search for Truth Continued, The Privilege Retained: A
Response to Judge Frankel", see 54 U. Colo. L. Rev. 67 (1982).
For article, "Descriptions of Disciplinary Matters", see
14 Colo. Law. 1418 (1985).
Annotator's note. The following annotations include
cases decided under former provisions similar to this rule.
Constitutionality upheld.
This rule is not unconstitutionally vague on its face or as applied.
People v. Morley, 725 P.2d 510 (Colo. 1986).
Standards used in determining constitutional challenges to rule.
Same standards used in determining a constitutional challenge to a
statute are used in determining constitutional challenge to this rule
or a disciplinary rule under the code of professional responsibility.
People v. Morley, 725 P.2d 510 (Colo. 1986).
Presumption of constitutionality attaches to such enactment, and the
burden is on the party challenging an enactment to demonstrate its
unconstitutionality beyond a reasonable doubt.
People v. Morley, 725 P.2d 510 (Colo. 1986).
Since a disciplinary rule is promulgated for the purpose of guiding
lawyers in their professional conduct, and is not directed to the public
at large, the central consideration in resolving a vagueness challenge
should be whether the nature of the proscribed conduct encompassed by the
rule is readily understandable to a licensed lawyer.
People v. Morley, 725 P.2d 510 (Colo. 1986).
ABA standards for imposing lawyer sanctions utilized to determine
proper sanction in disciplinary proceeding and certain findings as to
aggravating and mitigating factors made. People v. Susman, 787 P.2d 1119
(Colo. 1990);
In re Quiat, 979 P.2d 1029 (Colo. 1999);
In re Meyers, 981 P.2d 143 (Colo. 1999).
Applied in
People v. Schermerhorn, 193 Colo. 364, 567 P.2d 799 (1977);
People v. Pittam, 194 Colo. 104, 572 P.2d 135 (1977);
People v. Voss, 196 Colo. 485, 587 P.2d 787 (1978);
People v. Harthun, 197 Colo. 1, 593 P.2d 324 (1979);
People ex rel. Gallagher v. Hertz, 608 P.2d 335 (Colo. 1979);
People ex rel. Goldberg v. Gordon, 199 Colo. 296, 607 P.2d 995 (1980);
People v. Barbour, 199 Colo. 126, 612 P.2d 1082 (1980);
People v. Hilgers, 200 Colo. 211, 612 P.2d 1134 (1980);
People v. Lanza, 200 Colo. 241, 613 P.2d 337 (1980);
People v. Dixon, 200 Colo. 520, 616 P.2d 103 (1980);
People v. Hurst, 200 Colo. 537, 618 P.2d 1113 (1980);
People v. Berge, 620 P.2d 23 (Colo. 1980);
People v. Davis, 620 P.2d 725 (Colo. 1980);
People v. Gottsegen, 623 P.2d 878 (Colo. 1981);
People v. Luxford, 626 P.2d 675 (Colo. 1981);
People v. Dutton, 629 P.2d 103 (Colo. 1981);
People v. Rotenberg, 635 P.2d 220 (Colo. 1981);
People v. Barbour, 639 P.2d 1065 (Colo. 1982);
People v. Whitcomb, 676 P.2d 11 (Colo. 1983);
People v. Emmert, 676 P.2d 672 (Colo. 1983);
People v. Spangler, 676 P.2d 674 (Colo. 1983);
People v. Moore, 681 P.2d 480 (Colo. 1984);
People v. Underhill, 683 P.2d 349 (Colo. 1984);
People v. Simon, 698 P.2d 228 (Colo. 1985);
People v. Franco, 698 P.2d 230 (Colo. 1985);
People v. Madrid, 700 P.2d 558 (Colo. 1985);
People v. Blanck, 700 P.2d 560 (Colo. 1985);
People v. Danker, 735 P.2d 874 (Colo. 1987);
People v. Quintana, 752 P.2d 1059 (Colo. 1988);
People v. Smith, 778 P.2d 685 Colo. (1989).
II.GROUNDS.
A.In General.
Violation of election laws sufficient to justify public censure.
People v. Casias, 646 P.2d 391 (Colo. 1982).
Actions taken by attorney contrary to court order violate this rule
and justify suspension. People v. Awenius, 653 P.2d 740 (Colo. 1982).
Demonstration of rehabilitation required for readmittance to bar.
Where a practicing attorney breached fiduciary duties to his client in
misrepresenting his dealings and in handling of funds given to him in
trust, his conduct warranted disbarment, and before he may seek
readmittance to the state bar association, he must first demonstrate to the
grievance committee that rehabilitation
has occurred and that he is entitled to a new start. People ex rel. Buckley
v. Beck, 199 Colo. 482, 610 P.2d 1069 (1980).
Actions of a suspended attorney who took part in a complex real estate
transaction and engaged in the practice of law by representing, counseling,
advising, and assisting a former client warranted suspension until he
demonstrates
by clear and convincing evidence that (1) he has been rehabilitated; (2)
he has complied with and will continue to comply with all applicable
disciplinary orders and rules; and (3) he is competent and fit to practice
law. People v. Belfor, 200 Colo. 44, 611 P.2d 979 (1980).
Maximum suspension of three years rather than disbarment appropriate
for attorney who violated a number of disciplinary rules including filing a
false claim for loss of unemployment damages; failure to prepare case for
trial
over two-year period; failure to file affidavit required under grandparent
visitation statute; arriving at settlement conference in intoxicated state;
failure to file complaint and representing to client that case was close to
being
settled; and failure to notify disciplinary counsel of conviction of driving
while ability impaired. People v. Anderson, 828 P.2d 228 (Colo. 1992).
Aggravating factors present in case
include attorney's substantial experience in the practice of law,
attorney's prior disciplinary record,
attorney's pattern of misconduct taking place over several years
and involving multiple offenses,
the practice of deceit by attorney to mislead clients concerning
the status of their cases,
the obstruction of disciplinary proceedings by attorney's intentional
failure to respond to requests for investigation, and
the display of indifference to making restitution
by the failure to repay a retainer after promising to do so.
People v. Fahrney, 791 P.2d 1116 (Colo. 1990).
Aggravating factors present in case were:
(1) A dishonest and selfish motive on the part of the respondent;
(2) a pattern of misconduct;
(3) multiple offenses; and
(4) substantial experience in the practice of law.
People v. Finesilver, 826 P.2d 1256 (Colo. 1992).
Aggravating factors present in case include: (1) The attorney's prior disciplinary record;
(2) a dishonest or selfish attitude on the part of the attorney; (3) a pattern of misconduct; (4)
the attorney's refusal to acknowledge the wrongfulness of his conduct; (5) the vulnerability
of the client's wife and her children during the attorney's representation of them; and (6) the
attorney's substantial experience in the practice of law. In re Quiat, 979 P.2d 1029 (Colo.
1999).
Aggravating factors present in case include: (1) Attorney's history of prior
discipline; (2) the vulnerable status of the attorney's victims; and (3) the attorney's
obstruction of the disciplinary process. In re Meyers, 981 P.2d 143 (Colo. 1999).
Mitigating factors present in case included
the respondent's full and free disclosure to the grievance committee and
the hearing board, good character and reputation,
and the respondent's remorse for wrongdoing.
People v. Finesilver, 826 P.2d 1256 (Colo. 1992).
Insofar as respondent's addiction to illegal drugs was a symptom of
more deeply seated psychological and emotional problems,
the respondent established the existence of these allegedly
mitigating factors.
However, even though the respondent testified that none of the converted
funds were used to purchase illegal drugs, the supreme court is
inclined to view the respondent's drug use itself as an aggravating
rather than mitigating factor.
People v. Finesilver, 826 P.2d 1256 (Colo. 1992).
Several significant aggravating factors are that
the respondent engaged in multiple offenses and in a pattern of misconduct,
failed to cooperate with the grievance committee
in the attorney discipline proceedings,
and submitted false statements and false
evidence to the court in a related proceeding.
People v. Hellewell, 827 P.2d 527 (Colo. 1992).
Aggravating factors in case where three-year suspension rather than
disbarment imposed include prior disciplinary offenses, pattern of
misconduct, multiple offenses, submission of false evidence, false
statements, or other
deceptive practices during disciplinary process,
refusal to acknowledge the wrongful nature of conduct, vulnerability of
victim,
and substantial experience in the practice of law. Mitigating factors
include remoteness of prior offenses and gesture of restitution.
People v. Anderson, 828 P.2d 228 (Colo. 1992).
Public censure was appropriate where attorney made false statements in the
course of discovery in cases where the attorney was the plaintiff. Evidence
showed that the attorney was suffering from a psychiatric condition at the
time, and the assistant disciplinary counsel could not prove that the
attorney's false statements were knowing, but only that they were negligent.
People v. Dillings, 880 P.2d 1220 (Colo. 1994).
Mitigating factors present in case include: (1) At the time of the misconduct, the
attorney was experiencing personal problems; (2) the attorney cooperated during the
disciplinary proceedings; (3) the attorney has a good character and reputation in the
community; and (4) there has been a substantial delay in these disciplinary proceedings. In
re Quiat, 979 P.2d 1029 (Colo. 1999).
Attorney's depression did not qualify as mitigating factor of mental
disability where no testimony showed depression caused the misconduct.
People v. Reynolds, 933 P.2d 1295 (Colo. 1997).
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 did not prevent the
Colorado
supreme court from disciplining attorney who suffered from depression in
light of
finding that the depression had not been shown to have directly caused his
misconduct. People v. Reynolds, 933 P.2d 1295 (Colo. 1997).
Demonstration of drug rehabilitation and of improved business practices
required for reinstatement. Where attorney was suspended for misuse of
client funds due to confusion and inattention resulting from cocaine
addiction,
he would be required to demonstrate a history of negative drug screening
tests and that he had educated himself about the business aspects of
practicing law, including the handling of trust accounts, to qualify for
reinstatement
following three-year suspension. People v. Schubert, 799 P.2d 388 (Colo.
1990).
Demonstration of participation in a course of therapy for clinical
depression required for reinstatement where attorney was suspended for
inattention resulting from such depression. People v. Barr, 855 P.2d 1386
(Colo. 1993).
Demonstration of four conditions required for attorney publicly
censured after conviction of driving while ability impaired: Continue
psychotherapy, remain on antabuse, submit monthly reports regarding
progress on antabuse, and execute written authorization to therapist to
release medical information regarding status on antabuse. People v.
Rotenberg, 911 P.2d 642 (Colo. 1996).
Pattern of misconduct involving failure to render services, multiple
offenses, and conversion of client's property sufficient to justify
disbarment. People v. Vermillion, 814 P.2d 795 (Colo. 1991).
Conduct found to violate this rule.
People v. Bugg, 635 P.2d 881 (Colo. 1981).
Conduct violating this rule in conjunction with other disciplinary
rules is
sufficient to justify public censure. People v. Barnthouse, 941 P.2d 916
(Colo. 1997).
Conduct violating this rule sufficient to justify public censure.
People v. Bollinger, 648 P.2d 620 (Colo. 1982);
People v. Bergmann, 716 P.2d 1089 (Colo. 1986);
People v. Mayer, 716 P.2d 1094 (Colo. 1986);
People v. Carpenter, 731 P.2d 726 (Colo. 1987);
People v. Horn, 738 P.2d 1186 (Colo. 1987);
People v. Stauffer, 745 P.2d 240 (Colo. 1987);
People v. Wilson, 745 P.2d 248 (Colo. 1987);
People v. Dowhan, 759 P.2d 4 (Colo. 1988);
People v. Wyman, 769 P.2d 1076 (Colo. 1989);
People v. Smith, 769 P.2d 1078 (Colo. 1989);
People v. Feiman, 778 P.2d 830 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Vigil, 779 P.2d 372 (Colo. 1989);
People v. Malman, 779 P.2d 380 (Colo. 1989).
People v. Barr, 805 P.2d 440 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Volk, 805 P.2d 1116 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Tatum, 814 P.2d 388 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Shunneson, 814 P.2d 800 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Mulvihill, 814 P.2d 805 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Gebauer, 821 P.2d 782 (1991);
People v. Borchard, 825 P.2d 999 (Colo. 1992);
People v. Dillings, 880 P.2d 1220 (Colo. 1994);
People v. Tauger, 893 P.2d 121 (Colo. 1995).
Evidence sufficient to justify suspension from the practice of law.
People v. Belfor, 197 Colo. 223, 591 P.2d 585 (1979);
People v. Goss, 646 P.2d 334 (Colo. 1982).
Conduct violating this rule sufficient to justify suspension.
People v. Yaklich, 646 P.2d 938 (Colo. 1982);
People v. Craig, 653 P.2d 1115 (Colo. 1982);
People v. Kane, 655 P.2d 390 (Colo. 1982);
People v. Vernon, 660 P.2d 879 (Colo. 1982);
People v. Tyler, 678 P.2d 1014 (Colo. 1984);
People v. Pilgrim, 698 P.2d 1322 (Colo. 1985);
People v. Spurlock, 713 P.2d 829 (Colo. 1985);
People v. Doolittle, 713 P.2d 834 (Colo. 1985);
People v. Foster, 716 P.2d 1069 (Colo. 1986);
People v. Coca, 716 P.2d 1073 (Colo. 1986);
People v. Barnett, 716 P.2d 1076 (Colo. 1986);
People v. Larson, 716 P.2d 1093 (Colo. 1986);
People v. McPhee, 728 P.2d 1292 (Colo. 1986);
People v. Yost, 729 P.2d 348 (Colo. 1986);
People v. Holmes, 731 P.2d 677 (Colo. 1987);
People v. May, 745 P.2d 218 (Colo. 1987);
People v. Turner, 746 P.2d 49 (Colo. 1987);
People v. Geller, 753 P.2d 235 (Colo. 1988);
People v. Convery, 758 P.2d 1338 (Colo. 1988);
People v. Lustig, 758 P.2d 1342 (Colo. 1988);
People v. Goldberg, 770 P.2d 408 (Colo. 1989);
People v. Barnthouse, 775 P.2d 545 (Colo. 1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1026,
110 S. Ct. 734, 107 L.Ed.2d 752 (1990);
People v. Fahrney, 782 P.2d 743 (Colo. 1989);
People v. Bottinelli, 782 P.2d 746 (Colo. 1989);
People v. Chappell, 783 P.2d 838 (Colo. 1989);
People v. Gregory, 788 P.2d 823 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Bergmann, 790 P.2d 840 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Hensley-Martin, 795 P.2d 262 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Garrett, 802 P.2d 1082 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Crimaldi, 804 P.2d 863 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Mandell, 813 P.2d 732 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Whitaker, 814 P.2d 812 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Dowhan, 814 P.2d 822 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Nulan, 820 P.2d 111 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Williams, 824 P.2d 813 (Colo. 1992);
People v. Dieters, 825 P.2d 478 (Colo. 1992);
People v. Eaton, 828 P.2d 246 (Colo. 1992);
People v. Williams, 915 P.2d 669 (Colo. 1996);
People v. Pierson, 917 P.2d 275 (Colo. 1996);
People v. Reynolds, 933 P.2d 1295 (Colo. 1997);
People v. Graham, 933 P.2d 1321 (Colo. 1997);
People v. Nelson, 941 P.2d 922 (Colo. 1997).
Conduct violating this rule in conjunction with other
disciplinary rules is sufficient to justify disbarment.
People v. Ashley, 817 P.2d 965 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Rouse, 817 P.2d 967 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Calt, 817 P.2d 969 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Koransky, 824 P.2d 819 (Colo. 1992);
People v. Brown, 840 P.2d 348 (Colo. 1992);
People v. Bennett, 843 P.2d 1385 (Colo. 1993);
People v. Walsh, 880 P.2d 766 (Colo. 1994);
People v. Madigan, 938 P.2d 1162 (Colo. 1997);
People v. Odom, 941 P.2d 919 (Colo. 1997);
People v. Clyne, 945 P.2d 1386 (Colo. 1997);
In re Hugen, 973 P.2d 1267 (Colo. 1999).
Conduct violating this rule sufficient to justify disbarment.
People v. Dwyer, 652 P.2d 1074 (Colo. 1982);
People v. Golden, 654 P.2d 853 (Colo. 1982);
People v. Blanck, 713 P.2d 832 (Colo. 1985);
People v. Martinez, 739 P.2d 838 (Colo. 1987),
cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1054, 108 S. Ct. 1003, 98 L.Ed.2d 970 (1988);
People v. Lovett, 753 P.2d 205 (Colo. 1988);
People v. Brooks, 753 P.2d 208 (Colo. 1988);
People v. Cantor, 753 P.2d 238 (Colo. 1988);
People v. Turner, 758 P.2d 1335 (Colo. 1988);
People v. Danker, 759 P.2d 14 (Colo. 1988);
People v. Reeves, 766 P.2d 1192 (Colo. 1988);
People v. Felker, 770 P.2d 402 (Colo. 1989);
People v. Kengle, 772 P.2d 605 (Colo. 1989);
People v. Greene, 773 P.2d 528 (Colo. 1989);
People v. Vernon, 782 P.2d 745 (Colo. 1989);
People v. Johnston, 782 P.2d 1195 (Colo. 1989);
People v. Hedicke, 785 P.2d 918 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Dulaney, 785 P.2d 1302 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Gregory, 797 P.2d 42 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Stayton, 798 P.2d 903 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Dohe, 800 P.2d 71 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Broadhurst, 803 P.2d 478 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Goens, 803 P.2d 480 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Bergmann, 807 P.2d 568 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Rhodes, 814 P.2d 787 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Wilson, 814 P.2d 791 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Grossenbach, 814 P.2d 810 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Hansen, 814 P.2d 816 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Kramer, 819 P.2d 77 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Finesilver, 826 P.2d 1256 (Colo. 1992);
People v. Kelley, 840 P.2d 1068 (Colo. 1992);
People v. Littlefield, 893 P.2d 773 (Colo. 1995);
People v. Townshend, 933 P.2d 1327 (Colo. 1997).
B.Violation of Code of
Professional Responsibility.
Law reviews.
For article, "Punishing Ethical Violations: Aggravating and Mitigating
Factors", see 20 Colo. Law. 243 (1991).
Annotator's note.
For additional annotations, see the annotations under the disciplinary
rules for the canons included in the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Disbarment is warranted where attorney converted client funds and
where factors in mitigation, although present, were not sufficient to justify
a lesser sanction. People v. Ogborn, 887 P.2d 21 (Colo. 1994).
District attorney's failure to prosecute personal friend for possession
of marijuana violates code of professional responsibility and warrants
three-year
suspension. People v. Larsen, 808 P.2d 1265 (Colo. 1991).
Suspension for one year and one day was warranted for attorney who
violated C.R.P.C. 1.1 and C.R.P.C. 8.4 by preparing and filing child
support worksheets that failed to properly reflect the new stipulation
concerning custody and where aggravating factors included a previous
disciplinary history and failure to appear in the grievance proceedings
in violation of section (7) of this rule. People v. Davies, 926 P.2d 572
(Colo. 1996).
Conduct violating this rule in conjunction with other disciplinary rules is
sufficient to justify public censure. People v. Smith, 819 P.2d 497 (Colo.
1991).
Conduct violating this rule in conjunction with other
disciplinary rules is sufficient to justify suspension.
People v. Moya, 793 P.2d 1154 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Creasey, 793 P.2d 1159 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Schmad, 793 P.2d 1162 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Lopez, 796 P.2d 957 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Sullivan, 802 P.2d 1091 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Lamberson, 802 P.2d 1098 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Rhodes, 803 P.2d 514 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Flores, 804 P.2d 192 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Ross, 810 P.2d 659 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Dash, 811 P.2d 36 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Honaker, 814 P.2d 785 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Heilbrunn, 814 P.2d 819 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Mulligan, 817 P.2d 1028 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Redman, 819 P.2d 495 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Rader, 822 P.2d 950 (Colo. 1992);
People v. Farrant, 852 P.2d 452 (Colo. 1993);
People v. Robinson, 853 P.2d 1145 (Colo. 1993);
People v. Barr, 855 P.2d 1386 (Colo. 1993);
People v. Dickinson, 903 P.2d 1132 (Colo. 1995);
In re Demaray, 8 P.3d 427 (Colo. 1999).
Conduct violating this rule in conjunction with other
disciplinary rules is sufficient to justify disbarment.
People v. Lyons, 762 P.2d 143 (Colo. 1988);
People v. Frank, 782 P.2d 769 (Colo. 1989);
In re Bilderback, 971 P.2d 1061 (Colo. 1999).
C.Violation of Legal Ethics.
Where severe sanctions necessitated. Where misconduct is grievous
and demonstrates insensitivity to the professional obligations of a lawyer,
it necessitates a severe sanction to reflect the gravity of the breach of
ethical standards and to protect the public from future unprofessional
conduct. People v. Razatos, 636 P.2d 666 (Colo. 1981), appeal dismissed,
455 U.S. 930, 102 S. Ct. 1415, 71 L.Ed.2d 639 (1982).
Of more concern is our responsibility to protect the public interest
by ensuring continued confidence of the people of this state in the
function and role of the office of district attorney and the integrity
of the legal profession and the judicial system.
People v. Brown, 726 P.2d 638 (Colo. 1986).
The public has a right to expect that one who engages in such gregarious
professional misconduct shall be disciplined appropriately.
People v. Kendrick, 646 P.2d 337 (Colo. 1982).
Where an attorney demonstrates an extreme indifference to the welfare of
his clients and the status of their cases and an extreme insensitivity to
his professional duties in the face of adverse judgments due to neglect,
client complaints, and repeated disciplinary proceedings, disbarment
is the appropriate sanction. People v. Wyman, 782 P.2d 339 (Colo. 1989).
Total disregard of obligation to protect a client's rights and interests
over an extended period of time in conjunction with the violation of a
number of disciplinary rules and an extended prior record of
discipline requires most severe sanction of disbarment. People v. O'Leary,
783 P.2d 843 (Colo. 1989).
The severity of the ethical violations may be balanced by lack of
prior discipline, absence of injury to clients, compliance with court
ordered treatment plan, and dismissal of criminal charges in felony
prosecution. People v. Abelman, 744 P.2d 486 (Colo. 1987).
Continued representation of clients with conflicting interests
violates this rule and warrants discipline.
People v. Awenius, 653 P.2d 740 (Colo. 1982).
Adjudicating, as a judge, the criminal case of a person who is his client
in a divorce proceeding warrants public censure because it is the duty of
an attorney-judge to promptly disclose conflicts of interest and to
disqualify himself without suggestion from anyone. People v. Perrott, 769
P.2d 1075 (Colo. 1989).
Unauthorized recordation of telephone conversation established
unethical conduct. Telephone conversation, which attorney initiated and
recorded without the permission of other party to conversation, established
unethical conduct on attorney's part. People v. Wallin, 621 P.2d 330 (Colo. 1981).
Suggesting that witness have ex parte communication with chief justice.
Where an attorney suggested to a principal witness in a pending grievance
proceeding against that attorney that he write a letter on behalf of the
attorney to the chief justice of the state supreme court, substantially
recanting his testimony in the grievance proceeding, the attorney's conduct
violated this rule and the code of professional responsibility. Public
censure is the appropriate discipline for this breach of professional
obligations. People v. Hertz, 638 P.2d 794 (Colo. 1982).
Most severe punishment is required when a lawyer disregards his
professional obligations and converts his clients' funds to his own use.
People v. Kluver, 199 Colo. 511, 611 P.2d 971 (1980);
People v. Kendrick, 646 P.2d 337 (Colo. 1982);
People v. Bealmear, 655 P.2d 402 (Colo. 1982);
People v. Costello, 781 P.2d 85 (Colo. 1989).
Conversion of client funds is conduct warranting disbarment because it
destroys the trust essential to the attorney-client relationship, severely
damages the public's perception of attorneys, and erodes public confidence
in our legal system. People v. Radosevich, 783 P.2d 841 (Colo. 1989).
When an attorney converts client property,
disbarment is an appropriate sanction.
People v. Hellewell, 827 P.2d 527 (Colo. 1992).
Disbarment justified.
Misappropriation of client's funds, falsifying billing records of clients,
failure to disclose conviction, and disbarment from another state's bar
warrant disbarment. People v. Miller, 744 P.2d 489 (Colo. 1987).
Disbarment warranted where attorney accepted fees to represent clients after
an order of suspension was entered against the attorney and the attorney failed to notify
certain of his clients and opposing counsel of his suspension. People v. Zimmermann, 960
P.2d 85 (Colo. 1998).
Disbarment was the proper remedy in view of the numerous and grave
instances of professional misconduct, including the intentional
misappropriation of client funds. People v. Lefly, 902 P.2d 361 (Colo. 1995).
Aiding client to violate custody order sufficient to justify
disbarment.
People v. Chappell, 927 P.2d 829 (Colo. 1996).
Misappropriation of funds, failure to account, and deceit and fraud
in handling the affairs of a client necessitate that an attorney be disbarred.
People v. Bealmear, 655 P.2d 402 (Colo. 1982).
Misuse of funds by a lawyer strikes at the heart of the legal
profession by destroying public confidence in lawyers. The most severe
punishment is required when a lawyer disregards his
professional obligations and converts his clients' funds to his own use.
People v. Buckles, 673 P.2d 1008 (Colo. 1984).
Attorney's misuse of funds, writing of bad checks, and neglect in
handling a legal matter justify disbarment. People v. Murphy,
778 P.2d 658 (Colo. 1989).
A stipulation of misconduct admitting to withdrawing money while
acting as personal representative so that one's corporation can post an
appeal bond, converting funds from estates while serving as personal
representative, converting settlement proceeds, and converting funds while
serving as president of endowment foundation warrant disbarment. People v.
Costello, 781 P.2d 85 (Colo. 1989).
Converting estate or trust funds for one's personal use, overcharging
for services rendered, neglecting to return inquiries relating to client
matters, failing to make candid disclosures to grievance committee, and
attempting to conceal wrongdoing during disciplinary proceedings violates
this rule and warrants the severe sanction of disbarment. People v.
Gerdes, 782 P.2d 2 (Colo. 1989).
Exploiting a client's friendship and trust to extort funds for one's
personal use, failing to take any action on behalf of a client, and failing
to cooperate with the grievance committee in its investigation of complaints
with respect to such matters violates this rule and warrants disbarment.
People v. McMahill, 782 P.2d 336 (Colo. 1989).
Commingling trust funds, failing to maintain complete records of
client's funds, and failure to render appropriate accounts to client
constitutes grounds for discipline.
People v. Wright, 698 P.2d 1317 (Colo. 1985).
Failure to deposit funds in trust account, to notify client of
receipt of funds and provide accounting, and to forward file promptly to
new attorney and communicating with
former client on the subject of representation after client had obtained
new legal counsel, along with other offenses, warrants public censure.
People v. Swan, 764 P.2d 54 (Colo. 1988).
Public censure justified.
Failure to place client's funds in interest bearing account to detriment of
client, wrongful disbursement of funds, misrepresentation to the court, and
failure to comply with court order to produce documentation
warrant, at the very least, public censure. People v. C de Baca, 744 P.2d
512 (Colo. 1987).
Refusal to provide accounting for money and jewelry delivered to him,
and refusal to itemize the services performed and the costs incurred,
warrants disbarment. People v. Lanza, 660 P.2d 881 (Colo. 1983).
Failure and refusal to refund unearned portions of fees collected from
two clients constituted violations of this rule, DR 9-102, Code of Prof.
Resp., and DR 2-110, Code of Prof. Resp.
People v. Gellenthien, 621 P.2d 328 (Colo. 1981).
Suspension justified considering respondent's violations of ethical
duties
to client and other aggravating factors including a pattern of misconduct,
a substantial experience in the practice of law, and the vulnerability of
respondent's client. People v. Grossenbach, 803 P.2d 961 (Colo. 1991).
Where money was accepted for investment plans which were totally false,
fictitious, and fraudulent, attorney violated legal ethics and disbarment
was appropriate. People v. Kramer, 819 P.2d 77 (Colo. 1991).
An attorney's appearance as counsel of record in numerous court
proceedings following an order of suspension constituted grounds for attorney
discipline. People v. Kargol, 854 P.2d 1267 (Colo. 1993).
Attorney's admitted initiation of sexual contact and sexual
intrusion on a client violate sections (2), (3), and (5) of this
rule. People v. Dawson, 894 P.2d 756 (Colo. 1995).
D.Violation of Honesty,
Justice, or Morality.
Attorney never to obstruct justice or judicial process.
An attorney has a high duty as an officer of the court to never participate
in any scheme to obstruct the administration of justice or the judicial
process. People v. Kenelly, 648 P.2d 1065 (Colo. 1982);
People v. Haase, 781 P.2d 80 (Colo. 1989).
A lawyer who holds the position of district attorney, with the
substantial powers of that office, assumes responsibilities beyond those of
other lawyers and must be held to the highest standard of conduct. When
those powers are abused and duties ignored, the discipline must be
commensurate with the act. People v. Brown, 726 P.2d 638 (Colo. 1986).
Conduct of counsel found contrary to standards of honesty, justice and
integrity. People v. Emmert, 632 P.2d 562 (Colo. 1981).
Submission of false transcript to obtain admission to law school
and to qualify for admission as a member of the bar is a violation of this rule
and requires that respondent's admission to the bar be voided.
People v. Culpepper, 645 P.2d 5 (Colo. 1982).
Failure to disclose conviction and disbarment from another state's bar.
An attorney's failure to disclose her conviction and a subsequent disbarment
from bar of another state prior to being admitted to the Colorado bar
constitutes conduct involving fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation prejudicial to the
administration of justice. People v. Mattox, 639 P.2d 397 (Colo. 1982).
Attorney's failure to disclose felony conviction and subsequent
disbarment from bar of another state is sufficient for disbarment. People
v. Brunn, 764 P.2d 1165 (Colo. 1988).
Attorney/real estate broker lying to salesperson working for
attorney/real estate broker regarding progress and completion of transfer
of salesperson's license was a violation even though salesperson was not
a client. People v. Susman, 747 P.2d 667 (Colo. 1987).
Accepting marijuana in exchange for legal services warrants one-year
suspension from practice of law. People v. Davis, 768 P.2d 1227 (Colo. 1989).
Alcohol and health problems not excuse.
Alcohol and health problems, as well as emotional problems, do not excuse
an attorney's dilatory practices and false statements to his clients.
People v. Goss, 646 P.2d 334 (Colo. 1982).
Efforts at rehabilitation do not excuse conduct which includes dishonesty
and fraud, failing to preserve identity of client funds, and failing to
properly pay or deliver client funds, and which otherwise warrants disbarment.
People v. Shafer, 765 P.2d 1025 (Colo. 1988).
Attorney's conduct (committing fraud by check) provides grounds for
discipline under rules of civil procedure and violates the code of
professional responsibility. People v. Proffitt, 731 P.2d 1257 (Colo. 1987).
Chief deputy district attorney's theft of less than $50
constitutes conduct warranting public censure where significant mitigating
factors exist. People v. Buckley, 848 P.2d 353 (Colo. 1993).
Conduct violating this rule in conjunction with other disciplinary rules
is sufficient to justify public censure. People v. Rader, 822 P.2d 950
(Colo. 1992).
Attorney's failure to file personal state and federal income tax returns
and to pay withholding taxes for federal income taxes and FICA, and use of
cocaine and marijuana constitute conduct warranting suspension for one year
and one day. People v. Holt, 832 P.2d 948 (Colo. 1992).
Suspension of one year and one day warranted where attorney
sexually mistreated employees of his law firm. People v. Lowery,
894 P.2d 758 (Colo. 1995).
Suspension for one year and one day appropriate when attorney
terminated
representation without reasonable notice, failed to provide client with
accounting and
refund, and failed to meet continuing education requirements. Restitution
required as
condition of reinstatement. People v. Rivers, 933 P.2d 6 (Colo. 1997).
Suspension for one year and one day warranted where attorney knowingly
submitted a false statement to the small business administration for the purpose of obtaining
a loan. People v. Mitchell, 969 P.2d 662 (Colo. 1998).
Attorney's commission of bank fraud constitutes misconduct involving an
act or omission violating the highest standards of honesty, justice, or
morality and warrants disbarment. People v. Terborg, 848 P.2d 346 (Colo.
1993).
Six-month suspension justified where attorney knowingly failed
to perform services for client, knowingly violated court order,
engaged in dishonest conduct, and intentionally failed to respond to
formal complaint or to cooperate with grievance committee without
good cause. People v. Smith, 880 P.2d 763 (Colo. 1994).
Attorney's admitted initiation of sexual contact and sexual
intrusion on a client violate sections (2), (3), and (5) of this
rule. People v. Dawson, 894 P.2d 756 (Colo. 1995).
Public censure warranted for attorney's solicitation of prostitution
during
telephone conversation with wife of client whom he was representing in a dissolution of
marriage proceeding. People v. Bauder, 941 P.2d 282 (Colo. 1997).
Conduct violating this rule in conjunction with other disciplinary rules
is sufficient to justify suspension. People v. Eastepp, 884 P.2d 305
(Colo. 1994).
Conduct violating this rule in conjunction with other disciplinary
rules is sufficient to justify disbarment. People v. Sims, 913 P.2d 526
(Colo. 1996); People v. Allbrandt, 913 P.2d 532 (Colo. 1996).
E.Gross Negligence.
Lawyer owes obligation to client to act with diligence in handling
his client's legal work and in his representation of his client in court.
People v. Bugg, 200 Colo. 512, 616 P.2d 133 (1980).
Attorney violated section (4) by engaging in two non-sufficient funds
transactions involving his "special" account, and 22 non-sufficient funds
transactions in his personal account. People v. Johnson, 944 P.2d 524
(Colo. 1997).
Failure to take action on behalf of client. In failing to represent
or take any action on behalf of his client after he was retained and entrusted
with work and in making representations to his client which were false,
an attorney violates this rule and the code of professional responsibility.
People v. Southern, 638 P.2d 787 (Colo. 1982).
Failing to record deeds of trust.
An attorney's conduct in borrowing money from his former clients and in
failing to record deeds of trust on their behalf to be used as security
constitutes professional misconduct and is sufficient to justify suspension.
People v. Brackett, 667 P.2d 1357 (Colo. 1983).
Continued pattern of conduct involving neglect and misrepresentation.
Attorney disbarred for continued pattern of conduct involving neglect and
misrepresentation, and for failure to cooperate in investigation by grievance committee.
People v. Young, 673 P.2d 1003 (Colo. 1984);
People v. Johnston, 759 P.2d 10 (Colo. 1988).
Pattern of neglect which has not been corrected despite lesser
sanctions requires imposition of suspension for protection of public.
People v. Mayer, 744 P.2d 509 (Colo. 1987).
Repeated neglect and delay in handling legal matters and failure to comply
with the directions contained in a letter of admonition and to answer
letter of complaint from the grievance committee constitute a violation of
this rule and, with other offenses of the code of professional responsibility,
are sufficient to justify suspension for three years. People v.
Hebenstreit, 764 P.2d 51 (Colo. 1988).
Abandoning clients sufficient to justify disbarment.
People v. Sanders, 713 P.2d 837 (Colo. 1985);
People v. Susman, 787 P.2d 1119 (Colo.
1990).
Conduct manifesting gross carelessness in representation of clients
is sufficient to justify suspension.
People v. Roehl, 655 P.2d 1381 (Colo. 1983).
Attorney's neglect of dissolution case and misrepresentation to client
concerning the filing of dissolution petition was especially egregious in
view of client's desire to remarry. Conduct, in addition to number
and severity of other instances of misconduct, taking into account mitigating
factors, is sufficient for suspension. People v. Griffin, 764 P.2d 1166 (Colo.
1988).
Failure to perform adequate research on statute of limitations problem,
given the time available and the urgings of clients to proceed, constitutes
gross negligence within meaning of this rule. Attorney's claimed
reliance on federal court decision declaring statute of limitations
unconstitutional was objectively unreasonable in light of state court
decision
which expressly disagreed with federal court decision. People v. Barber, 799
P.2d 936 (Colo. 1990).
Suspension is appropriate discipline given the number and severity of
instances of misconduct, including pattern of neglect over clients' affairs
over lengthy period and in variety of circumstances and misrepresentation
in dissolution case to client who wished to remarry concerning the filing
of a dissolution petition. Considering proper mitigating factors such as
attorney's lack of experience, absence of prior discipline,
attorney's willingness
to undergo psychiatric evaluation and accept transfer to disability inactive
status, suspension without credit for time on disability inactive status
is appropriate. People v. Griffin, 764 P.2d 1166 (Colo. 1988).
Undertaking to provide services to clients in areas in which one lacks
experience, which would ordinarily result in a reprimand, warrants a
30-day suspension when coupled with continued neglect after private
censure. People v. Frank, 752 P.2d 539 (Colo. 1988).
Neglect of client matters, use of cocaine, and failure to
respond to complaint and client correspondence warrant public censure
in light of participation in comprehensive rehabilitation programs.
People v. Driscoll, 716 P.2d 1086 (Colo. 1986).
Respondent's continued neglect of matters entrusted to him,
including his failure to deliver a promissory note and
his failure to record a deed of trust,
and respondent's acceptance of a retainer and his subsequent failure
to litigate the matter
warrant suspension from the practice of law for two years.
Respondent's misconduct was aggravated by
his failure to cooperate with the grievance committee.
People v. Fagan, 791 P.2d 1123 (Colo. 1990).
Failure to timely file a paternity action constitutes neglect of a
legal matter that warrants public censure. People v. Good, 790 P.2d 331
(Colo. 1990).
Suspension for one year and one day appropriate where attorney violated
section (4) by not returning or accounting for client funds held for
emergencies
after the clients fired the attorney and for negligently converting other
client funds to the
attorney's own use. People v. Johnson, 944 P.2d 524 (Colo. 1997).
Abandonment of law practice and conversion of clients' funds to
attorney's own use justifies disbarment of attorney.
People v. Franks, 791 P.2d 1 (Colo. 1990).
Disbarment is appropriate discipline for attorney who caused
potentially
serious injury to clients by abandoning his practice, knowingly failing to
perform services for clients, and engaging in pattern of neglect. People
v. Nichols, 796 P.2d 966 (Colo. 1990).
Aggravating factors in case were
the previous issuance of a letter of admonition for a disciplinary offense,
the lawyer's actions in dealing with clients which establish a dishonest or
selfish motive, the acceptance of new clients and the charging of retainers
immediately before lawyer moved to Ireland,
multiple offenses and a repetition of the same conduct,
the bad faith obstruction of the disciplinary process,
the utilization of the substantial experience and expertise of the lawyer
in the practice of law to collect substantial fees for services that the
lawyer knew he could not perform, and the total indifference of the lawyer
to making restitution and to repaying misappropriated funds. People v.
Franks, 791 P.2d 1 (Colo. 1990).
Neglect of a legal matter entrusted to the attorney and
misrepresentation to the client in connection with a real estate
transaction constituted violations of this rule and various other rules.
People v. Susman, 787 P.2d 1119 (Colo. 1990).
Failure to file petition for dissolution of marriage
and failure to return unearned legal fees
sufficient to warrant 45-day suspension.
People v. Combs, 805 P.2d 1115 (Colo. 1991).
Attorney's lack of preparation for trial constituted gross
negligence. People v. Butler, 875 P.2d 219 (Colo. 1994).
F.Criminal Behavior.
Disciplinary proceedings are sui generis in nature,
and conviction of a criminal offense is not a condition precedent
to the institution of such proceedings nor does acquittal constitute
a ban to such proceedings.
People v. Harfmann, 638 P.2d 745 (Colo. 1981);
People v. Morley, 725 P.2d 510 (Colo. 1986).
Acquittal may be considered by grievance committee.
Although an acquittal is not a bar to disciplinary action, it may be
considered by the grievance committee.
People v. Kenelly, 648 P.2d 1065 (Colo. 1982).
Disbarment warranted by attorney's conviction of conspiracy to
deliver counterfeited federal reserve notes, serious neglect of several
legal matters, unjustified retention of clients' property, failure to respond to the
grievance committee, and previous disciplinary record.
People v. Mayer, 752 P.2d 537 (Colo. 1988).
Felonious conduct and violation of code of professional responsibility
justifies disbarment. Where a lawyer's conduct not only constitutes a
violation of the code of professional responsibility, but also involves
felonious conduct, clearly and convincingly proven by testimony of sheriff's
officers, the grievance committee is justified in requiring disbarment.
People v. Harfmann, 638 P.2d 745 (Colo. 1981).
Conviction of a district attorney of two felonies and a misdemeanor
while in office warrants the most severe sanction -- disbarment.
People v. Brown, 726 P.2d 638 (Colo. 1986).
Conviction of a serious felony involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, and
conversion of clients funds in another state and failure to notify Colorado
authorities of same justifies disbarment. People v. Hedicke, 785 P.2d 918
(Colo. 1990).
Use of license to practice law for the purpose of bringing into being
an illegal prostitution enterprise renders disbarment the only possible
form of discipline. Any lesser sanction would unduly depreciate such
misconduct in the eyes of the public and the legal profession.
People v. Morley, 725 P.2d 510 (Colo. 1986).
Disbarment not unjust discipline for embezzling funds
from estate of client, conversion of money belonging to employer,
and convictions of theft and unlawful distribution and possession
of controlled substance, after consenting to entry of disbarment in
another jurisdiction. People v. Fitzke, 716 P.2d 1065 (Colo. 1986).
Where there is a great weight of mitigating evidence, even
when an attorney has engaged in serious criminal conduct which would
ordinarily justify disbarment, a three-year suspension and the requirement
to pay costs of the disciplinary proceeding may be appropriate in lieu of
disbarment. People v. Preblud, 764 P.2d 822 (Colo. 1988).
Existence of numerous mitigating
factors warrant three-year suspension and payment of costs rather than
disbarment for attorney convicted of felony violations of the
California Revenue and Taxation Code. People v. Mandell, 813 P.2d 732 (Colo.
1991).
Felony theft held sufficient grounds for suspension.
People v. Petrie, 642 P.2d 519 (Colo. 1982).
Defendant intentionally and without permission took eyeglass frames from two retail
stores
and thereby violated section (5). There were many aggravating factors, the only
mitigating
factor was a suspension eight years prior. One year suspension levied. People v.
Barnthouse, 948
P.2d 534 (Colo. 1997).
Conviction for sale of narcotic drug warrants disbarment and action
striking attorney's name from the role of lawyers authorized to practice
before the court. People v. McGonigle, 198 Colo. 315, 600 P.2d 61 (1979).
Conviction of conspiracy to violate drug laws.
A lawyer who enters into a conspiracy to violate the law by importing narcotic
drugs for distribution should be disbarred.
People v. Unruh, 621 P.2d 948 (Colo. 1980).
Conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine
warrants disbarment and the striking of the attorney's name from the roll
of attorneys licensed to practice in this state. People v. Avila, 778 P.2d 657
(Colo. 1989).
Use of professional status to accomplish illicit commercial transaction.
Violation of the criminal laws of Colorado is grounds for discipline, and
the use of one's professional status to accomplish an illicit commercial
transaction for profit demands the most severe sanction. People v. McGonigle,
198 Colo. 315, 600 P.2d 61 (1979).
Attorney's use of his position as director of a bank to arrange
financial transactions in a manner prohibited by federal law,
where his conduct was deliberate, carefully planned, and extended over
a period of a year and a half, justified disbarment, notwithstanding
such factors as attorney's full restitution to bank, his cooperation
with federal officials, his lack of any prior criminal record, his
history of community service, and the existence of psychological
problems which may have precipitated his illegal activity and which
have been acknowledged and solved.
People v. Loseke, 698 P.2d 809 (Colo. 1985).
Committing offense of bigamy and placing unauthorized signatures upon
land deeds warranted public censure. People v. Tucker, 755 P.2d 452 (Colo. 1988).
Committing offense of third-degree sexual assault on a client and recklessly
accusing a lawyer and judge of having an improper ex parte communication warranted
suspension for a year and a day, and, for purposes of a disciplinary proceeding, the sexual
assault only had to be proved by clear and convincing evidence, not beyond a reasonable
doubt. In re Egbune, 971 P.2d 1065 (Colo. 1999).
Neglect of client matters, use of cocaine, and failure to
respond to complaint and client correspondence warrant public censure
in light of participation in comprehensive rehabilitation programs.
People v. Driscoll, 716 P.2d 1086 (Colo. 1986).
Public censure appropriate in light of mitigating circumstances for
possession of cocaine in violation of state and federal controlled substance
laws. People v. Gould, 912 P.2d 556 (Colo. 1996).
Discharging firearm in direction of spouse while intoxicated, although
not a crime involving dishonesty, goes beyond mere negligence and public
censure
is appropriate. Mitigating factors, although present, were insufficient
to warrant making censure private. People v. Senn, 824 P.2d 822 (Colo. 1992).
Adopting a conscious scheme to take ownership of homes, collect rents
from tenants, make virtually no efforts to sell the homes, and permit
foreclosures to occur on which the department of housing and urban development
(HUD) would absorb the losses constituted equity skimming
in violation of Section 18-5-802 and constitutes a violation of sections
(A)(4) and (A)(6) for which suspension for one year is appropriate. People
v. Phelps, 837 P.2d 755 (Colo. 1992).
Suspension of one year and one day warranted for attorney who entered
guilty plea to class 5 felony of failure to pay employee income tax withheld
and who violated other disciplinary rules involving neglect of legal matter,
failure to seek lawful objectives of client, intentional failure to carry out
employment contract resulting in intentional prejudice or damage to
client. People v. Franks, 866 P.2d 1375 (Colo. 1994).
Suspension of two years warranted for attorney who reached a consent
settlement with the securities and exchange commission stating that he had employed
devices, schemes, or artifices to defraud or made untrue statements of material fact or
engaged in acts, practices, or courses of business which operated as a fraud or deceit upon
persons in violation of the Securities and Exchange Act. People v. Hanks, 967 P.2d 141
(Colo. 1998).
Where deputy district attorney was convicted of possession of cocaine
under federal law, one-year suspension is appropriate due to seriousness of
offense and fact that attorney had higher responsibility to the public by
virtue of engaging in law enforcement. People v. Robinson, 839 P.2d 4 (Colo.
1992).
Guilty pleas of deputy district attorney for acting as an accessory to a
crime and for official misconduct relating to the disposal of drug
paraphernalia
warrants six-month suspension. Respondent's status as a deputy district
attorney at the time she committed the offenses is an aggravating factor
because public officials engaged in law enforcement have assumed an even
greater responsibility to the public than have other lawyers. People v.
Freeman, 885 P.2d 205 (Colo. 1994).
Suspension of one year and one day appropriate for experienced attorney
and judicial officer who pled guilty to unlawful use of a controlled
substance.
People v. Stevens, 866 P.2d 1378 (Colo. 1994).
Attorney who was not charged or convicted of a substance abuse related
crime was suspended. The attorney's drug problem was self-reported, he had
voluntarily hospitalized himself and undergone an after-care program, and he
had over one year of sustained recovery. People v. Ebbert, 873 P.2d 731
(Colo. 1994).
Suspension of three years was appropriate for attorney who drove a vehicle on
at least four occasions after his driver's license was revoked and who also failed to appear
in two cases involving his illegal driving. People v. Hughes, 966 P.2d 1055 (Colo. 1998).
Suspension for one year and one day warranted where attorney failed to appear
in county court on a charge of driving under the influence. People v. Myers, 969 P.2d 701
(Colo. 1998).
Entering guilty pleas to multiple counts of bank fraud evidences
serious criminal conduct warranting disbarment. People v. Vidakovich, 810
P.2d 1071 (Colo. 1991).
Pleading guilty to a single count of bank fraud evidences serious
criminal
conduct warranting disbarment. People v. Terborg, 848 P.2d 346 (Colo.
1993).
Entering guilty plea to committing mail fraud evidences serious criminal
conduct warranting disbarment. People v. Bollinger, 859 P.2d 901 (Colo.
1993).
When a lawyer knowingly converts client funds, disbarment is virtually
automatic, at least in the absence of significant factors in mitigation.
People v. McDonnell, 897 P.2d 829 (Colo. 1995).
Convictions for conspiring to commit fraud against the United States and
impeding an officer of a United States court justify disbarment.
People v. Pilgrim, 802 P.2d 1084 (Colo. 1990).
Conviction for bankruptcy fraud warrants disbarment. People v. Brown,
841 P.2d 1066 (Colo. 1992).
Disbarment is warranted where attorney was convicted of felony offense of
forging a federal bankruptcy judge's signature and had engaged in multiple
types of other dishonest conduct and where there was an insufficient showing of
mental disability. People v. Goldstein, 887 P.2d 634 (Colo. 1994).
Suspension justified where respondent violated federal and state laws
by failing to file personal income tax returns, failing to pay withholding
taxes, using cocaine, and using marihuana. People v. Holt, 832 P.2d 948
(Colo. 1992).
The fact that no specific client of the respondent was actually harmed by
the respondent's misconduct misses the point in proceeding for suspension of
an attorney. While the primary purpose of attorney discipline is the
protection of the public and not to mete punishment to the offending lawyer,
lawyers are, nonetheless, charged with obedience to the law, and intentional
violation of those laws subjects an attorney to the severest discipline.
People v. Holt, 832 P.2d 948 (Colo. 1992).
Lack of prior disciplinary record insufficient to call for sanction
less than disbarrment where attorney convicted of bankruptcy fraud,
conspiracy to commit bankruptcy fraud and other federal offenses. People v.
Schwartz, 814 P.2d 793 (Colo. 1991).
Although attorney had not previously been disciplined, sanction of
disbarment was warranted where attorney's felony conviction for possession of
a firearm occurred while he was still on probation for a felony conviction
for possession of marijuana. People v. Laquey, 862 P.2d 278 (Colo. 1993).
Lack of prior disciplinary record insufficient to call for sanction
less than disbarment where attorney pleaded guilty to bribery. People v.
Viar, 848 P.2d 934 (Colo. 1993).
Conviction for aiding fugitive to flee warrants disbarment despite
lack of a prior disciplinary record. People v. Bullock, 882 P.2d 1390 (Colo. 1994).
Respondent given two-year suspension for aiding and abetting aliens'
entry into the United States and by advising clients to make
misrepresentations for such entry. Such an act generally warrants
disbarment, but respondent's full disclosure during proceedings, expression
of remorse, and the fact that a prior offense was remote in time were
mitigating factors. Respondent also required to discontinue the
representation of clients before INS and the Department of Labor. People
v. Boyle, 942 P.2d 1199 (Colo. 1997).
Six-month suspension justified for attorney pleading guilty to making and
altering a false and forged prescription for a controlled substance and of
criminal attempt to obtain a controlled substance by forgery and
alteration, where mitigating factors included: (1) No prior disciplinary
history; (2) personal or emotional problems at time of misconduct; (3) full
and free disclosure by attorney to grievance committee; (4) imposition of
other penalties and sanctions resulting from criminal proceeding; (5)
demonstration of genuine remorse; and (6) relative inexperience in the
practice of law. People v. Moore, 849 P.2d 40 (Colo. 1993).
Six-month suspension appropriate for respondent convicted of drunken
driving
offense and assault. People v. Shipman, 943 P.2d 458 (Colo. 1997);
People v.
Reaves, 943 P.2d 460 (Colo. 1997).
Chief deputy district attorney's theft of less than $50
constitutes conduct warranting public censure where significant mitigating
factors exist. People v. Buckley, 848 P.2d 353 (Colo. 1993).
Attorney's failure to file personal state and federal income tax returns
and to pay withholding taxes for federal income taxes and FICA, and use of
cocaine and marijuana constitute conduct warranting suspension for one year
and one day. People v. Holt, 832 P.2d 948 (Colo. 1992).
Failure to file federal income tax returns in combination with
mitigating factors of no prior discipline and significant personal problems at
the time of the misconduct warrants public censure. People v. Tauger, 893 P.2d
121 (Colo. 1995).
Public censure was appropriate where significant mitigating factors were
present. Attorney was convicted of vehicular assault, a class 4 felony, and two counts
of driving under the influence of alcohol. The crimes are strict liability offenses for which
attorney must serve three years in the custody of the department of corrections, followed by
a two-year mandatory period of parole. Section 18-1-105(3) provides that, while he is
serving his sentence, attorney is disqualified from practicing as an attorney in any state
courts. The sentence and disqualification from practicing law are a significant "other
penalty[] or sanction[]" and therefore a mitigating factor in determining the level of
discipline. In re Kearns, 991 P.2d 824 (Colo. 1999) (decided under former C.R.C.P.
241.6(5)).
Public censure was warranted where attorney twice requested arresting
officers
in driving under the influence cases not to appear at license revocation
hearings
before the department of motor vehicles. People v. Carey, 938 P.2d 1166
(Colo. 1997).
Public censure was appropriate where an already suspended attorney
was the subject of prior discipline for misdemeanor convictions of assault
and
driving while impaired and where an additional period of suspension would
have
little, if any, practical effect and would not have afforded a meaningful
measure of protection for the public. People v. Flores, 871 P.2d 1182 (Colo.
1994).
Public censure warranted for attorney's solicitation of prostitution
during
telephone conversation with wife of client whom he was representing in a
dissolution of
marriage proceeding. People v. Bauder, 941 P.2d 282 (Colo. 1997).
Suspension for 180 days is warranted based upon conviction of third
degree assault charges. People v. Knight, 883 P.2d 1055 (Colo. 1994).
Disbarment is warranted for driving while impaired, marihuana possession,
improperly executing agreement without authority, and failing to perform
certain professional duties, despite the lack of a prior record. People v.
Gerdes, 891 P.2d 995 (Colo. 1995).
Attorney's admitted initiation of sexual contact and sexual
intrusion on a client violate sections (2), (3), and (5) of this
rule. People v. Dawson, 894 P.2d 756 (Colo. 1995).
Disbarment warranted where attorney was convicted of two separate sexual
assaults on a client and a former client and attorney's previous dishonest
conduct was an aggravating factor as well as findings of the attorney's
selfish
motive in engaging in the sexual misconduct, the two clients' vulnerability,
the attorney's more than 20 years practicing law, and the attorney's failure
to
acknowledge the wrongful nature of his conduct. People v. Bertagnolli, 922
P.2d 935 (Colo. 1996).
Notwithstanding the entry of attorney's "Alford" plea in sexual assault
proceedings,
for purpose of disciplinary proceeding the attorney was held to have actually
committed the acts necessary to accomplish third degree sexual assault and
therefore the attorney knowingly had sexual contact with a former client and
with a current client without either woman's consent. People v. Bertagnolli,
922 P.2d 935 (Colo. 1996).
Disbarment warranted for attorney convicted of criminal attempt to commit
sexual exploitation of a child, a class 4 felony. People v. Damkar, 908
P.2d 1113 (Colo. 1996).
Disbarment warranted for attorney convicted of one count of sexual assault on a
child, notwithstanding lack of a prior record of discipline. People v. Espe, 967 P.2d 159
(Colo. 1998).
Disbarment warranted for attorney convicted in Hawaii of second-degree
murder. People v. Draizen, 941 P.2d 280 (Colo. 1997).
Disbarment warranted for writing nonsufficient funds checks while
practicing law during a period of suspension and committing several other
disciplinary
rules violations. People v. Fager, 938 P.2d 138 (Colo. 1997).
Disbarment justified in a reciprocal discipline proceeding where attorney convicted
of knowingly making false statements to obtain a loan from a federal savings and loan
institution. Attorney was also disbarred by the United States court of federal claims and
had his license revoked by the Virginia state bar for the same offense. Unless certain
exceptions exist, the same discipline that was imposed in the foreign jurisdiction is generally
imposed in a reciprocal discipline proceeding. People v. Kiely, 968 P.2d 110 (Colo. 1998).
Conduct violating this rule in conjunction with other disciplinary
rules is sufficient to justify disbarment. People v. Allbrandt, 913 P.2d
532 (Colo. 1996); In re Tolley, 975 P.2d 1115 (Colo. 1999)
(decided under former rule 241.6).
G.Violation of Other Rules.
Disbarment in another state violates this rule and warrants
disbarment. People v. Montano, 744 P.2d 480 (Colo. 1987);
People v. Brunn, 764 P.2d 1165 (Colo. 1988).
Disbarment from practice in federal court violates this rule and
warrants discipline. People v. Awenius, 653 P.2d 740 (Colo. 1982).
Suspension from practice in federal tax court violates this rule and
warrants discipline. People v. Hartman, 744 P.2d 482 (Colo. 1987).
Pattern of neglect which has not been corrected despite lesser
sanctions requires imposition of suspension for protection of public.
People v. Mayer, 744 P.2d 509 (Colo. 1987).
Repeated neglect and delay in handling legal matters and failure to comply
with the directions contained in a letter of admonition and to answer
letter of complaint from the grievance committee constitute a violation of
this rule and, with other offenses of the code of professional responsibility,
are sufficient to justify suspension for three years. People v.
Hebenstreit, 764 P.2d 51 (Colo. 1988).
Repeated misconduct charges warranted suspension of licenses.
Where respondent had been disciplined three times previously, once by private
censure and twice by letters of admonition and where two of the matters
involved delay and the respondent's failure to inform his clients of the
status of their cases, subsequent misconduct warranted that respondent's
license to practice law be suspended for six months. People ex rel. Silverman
v. Anderson, 200 Colo. 76, 612 P.2d 94 (1980).
Two-year suspension was not excessively harsh where previous suspension
and vulnerability of young, unsophisticated client in current matter are
properly considered as aggravating factors in fixing punishment.
People v. Yaklich, 744 P.2d 504 (Colo. 1987).
Continuing to represent client and failing to comply with disciplinary
rule after initial suspension from practice of law warrants suspension
for additional year.
People v. Underhill, 708 P.2d 790 (Colo. 1985).
Continuing to practice while suspended is conduct justifying disbarment.
People v. James, 731 P.2d 698 (Colo. 1987).
Conduct violating this rule, in conjunction with other disciplinary
rules,
sufficient to justify disbarment where the attorney continued to practice
law while
on suspension, repeatedly neglecting his clients and failing to take
reasonable steps to
protect clients' interests.
People v. Fager, 938 P.2d 138 (Colo. 1997).
Multiple criminal and traffic convictions demonstrate a pattern of misconduct,
and the presence of multiple offenses warrants suspension for six months with the
requirement of reinstatement proceedings. People v. Van Buskirk, 962 P.2d 975 (Colo.
1998).
H.Failure to Respond
to Grievance Committee.
Failure to answer a disciplinary complaint is itself a violation of
the disciplinary rules. People v. Richards, 748 P.2d 341 (Colo. 1987).
Continued pattern of conduct involving neglect and misrepresentation.
Attorney disbarred for continued pattern of conduct involving neglect and
misrepresentation, and for failure to cooperate in investigation by grievance
committee.
People v. Young, 673 P.2d 1003 (Colo. 1984);
People v. Johnston, 759 P.2d 10 (Colo. 1988).
Failure to respond to informal complaints constitutes failure
to respond to a request by the grievance committee without good cause.
People v. Quick, 716 P.2d 1082 (Colo. 1986).
Neglect of client matters, use of cocaine, and failure to
respond to complaint and client correspondence warrant public censure
in light of participation in comprehensive rehabilitation programs.
People v. Driscoll, 716 P.2d 1086 (Colo. 1986).
Failure to take action on behalf of client in civil action, failure to
advise client of claim, attempt to place property beyond the reach of
creditors, and failure to cooperate in disciplinary proceedings justifies
three-year suspension of attorney. People v. Baptie, 796 P.2d 978 (Colo.
1990).
Suspension for three years is appropriate where lawyer failed to respond
to motions or appear at hearing, resulting in dismissal of clients' bankruptcy
proceeding, thereby increasing clients' debts tenfold. The hearing board
further
found
that the attorney engaged in bad faith obstruction of the disciplinary
proceedings and refused to acknowledge the wrongful nature of his conduct or
the vulnerability of his clients. People v. Farrant, 883 P.2d 1 (Colo. 1994).
Fabrication of administrative decision and settlement discussions to
conceal respondent's failure to prosecute client's wage claim unnecessarily
wasted grievance committee's time and resources, warranting increased period
of suspension and relatively high assessment of costs. People v. Gaimara, 810
P.2d 1076 (Colo. 1991).
Disbarment appropriate remedy for attorney who neglected client's legal
matter, failed to return retainer after being requested to do so, abandoned law
practice, evaded process, and failed to respond to request of grievance
committee. People v. Williams, 845 P.2d 1150 (Colo. 1993).
Disbarment appropriate remedy for attorney who neglected a legal matter,
misappropriated funds and property, abandoned client, engaged in fraud, evaded process, and
failed to cooperate in disciplinary investigation. People v. Hindman, 958 P.2d 463 (Colo.
1998).
Disbarment warranted for attorney who abandoned her law practice,
disregarded court
orders, made misrepresentations to her clients, and failed to respond or appear, with
aggravating
factors. People v. Valley, 960 P.2d 141 (Colo. 1998).
Stipulation of deputy public defender that he failed to communicate with a
client for seven months and failed to answer in a timely manner either the
request for investigation or the formal complaint in the disciplinary
matter, and his neglect of six separate professional matters over a three-year
period warrant a 30-day suspension where substantial mitigating factors
exist, including the absence of a prior disciplinary history, the absence of
a selfish or dishonest motive, the presence of serious personal and emotional
problems, a cooperative attitude throughout the disciplinary proceedings, a
good character and professional reputation, the imposition of other penalties
or sanctions, and the presence of remorse. People v. Bobbitt, 859 P.2d 902
(Colo. 1993).
Failure to respond to request for investigation from grievance
committee is a violation of section (7).
People v. Taylor, 799 P.2d 930 (Colo. 1990);
People v. Dash, 811 P.2d 36 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Creasey, 811 P.2d 40 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Ashley, 817 P.2d 965 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Kramer, 819 P.2d 77 (Colo. 1991);
People v. Hebenstreit, 823 P.2d 125 (Colo. 1992);
People v. Raubolt, 831 P.2d 462 (Colo. 1992);
People v. Honaker, 847 P.2d 640 (Colo. 1993);
People v. Honaker, 863 P.2d 337 (Colo. 1993);
People v. Thomas, 925 P.2d 1081 (Colo. 1996).
Conduct violating this rule in conjunction with other disciplinary rules
is sufficient to justify public censure. People v. Titoni, 893 P.2d 1322
(Colo. 1995).
Conduct violating this rule in conjunction with other
disciplinary rules is sufficient to justify suspension when attorney
currently on disability inactive status. People v. Moya, 793 P.2d 1154
(Colo. 1990).
Conduct violating this rule in conjunction with other disciplinary rules
is sufficient to justify suspension. People v. Taylor, 799 P.2d 930
(Colo. 1990); People v. Raubolt, 831 P.2d 462 (Colo. 1992);
People v. Scott, 936 P.2d 573 (Colo. 1997).
Conduct violating this rule in conjunction with other disciplinary rules is
sufficient to justify disbarment. People v. Whitcomb, 819 P.2d 493 (Colo.
1991); People v. Fritsche, 897 P.2d 805 (Colo. 1995);
People v. Marsh, 908 P.2d 1115 (Colo. 1996);
People v. Mannix, 936 P.2d 1285 (Colo. 1997);
People v. Fager, 938 P.2d 138 (Colo. 1997);
People v. Holmes, 955 P.2d 1012 (Colo. 1998).
|
