C.R.C.P. 242.19

History

Source: Entire rule added and adopted May 20, 2021, effective for cases filed with the Presiding Disciplinary Judge or the Supreme Court on or after July 1, 2021, and, as to all other matters covered by these rules, effective July 1, 2021. ANNOTATION Annotator’s note. The following annotations include cases decided under former provisions similar to this rule. The supreme court will deny attorney’s application to voluntarily surrender his li- cense to practice law in the state of Colorado where the gravity of the attorney’s wrongful conduct necessitates disbarment. People v. Mur- phy, 174 Colo. 182, 483 P.2d 224 (1971). Surrender of a license pursuant to this rule is not confidential and will be made known to the National Disciplinary Data Bank for dis- semination on a national basis to other agencies who license attorneys. People v. Culpepper, 645 P.2d 5 (Colo. 1982). Stipulation to 18-month suspension is rea- sonable and warranted, given the number and seriousness of the charges balanced against the mitigating factors. People v. Taylor, 799 P.2d 930 (Colo. 1990). Stipulation to disbarment is appropriate where attorney pleaded guilty to felony menac- ing and had history of discipline. People v. Littlefield, 893 P.2d 773 (Colo. 1995). Attorney under investigation for miscon- duct may submit a stipulation and condi- tional admission at any time but inquiry panel should not normally accept it until the inquiry panel has authorized the disciplinary counsel to file a formal complaint. People v. Borchard, 825 P.2d 999 (Colo. 1992). Mitigating factors warranting suspension for three years. Conviction for distribution of cocaine is ‘‘serious crime’’ as defined in C.R.C.P. 241.16(e). However, mitigating factors including personal and emotional problems, full disclosure and cooperation with the grievance committee and the office of disciplinary coun- sel, and participation in interim rehabilitation warrant suspension from practice for three years. People v. Rhodes, 829 P.2d 850 (Colo. 1992). Mitigating factors warranting public cen- sure. Attorney who stipulated to misconduct admitted to activities warranting public censure. People v. Odom, 829 P.2d 855 (Colo. 1992). Respondent’s multiple acts of violence are indicative of a dangerous volatility which might well prejudice his ability to effectively represent his client’s interests. Although re- spondent had taken major steps toward rehabili- tation the acts committed were of such gravity as to require a public censure and a three-month suspension. People v. Wallace, 837 P.2d 1223 (Colo. 1992). Stipulated agreement and recommenda- tions of disbarment based on conditional admis- sion of misconduct warranted where respondent practiced law while suspended. People v. Redman, 902 P.2d 839 (Colo. 1995). Also warranted where attorney misappropri- ated and commingled client funds, failed to communicate with clients, engaged in dishonest conduct and conduct prejudicial to the adminis- tration of justice, charged unreasonable fees, neglected legal matters, and failed to pay funds to which a third person was entitled. People v. Clyne, 945 P.2d 1386 (Colo. 1997). Stipulated agreement and recommenda- tions of disbarment warranted where respon- dent pled guilty to conspiracy to commit secu- rities fraud and securities fraud. People v. Frye, 935 P.2d 10 (Colo. 1997). Stipulated agreement and recommenda- tions of suspension for nine months based upon conditional admission of misconduct were war- ranted for attorney who was suspended in an- other state for neglect, failure to communicate, and failure to surrender documents and other client property after termination of representa- tion. People v. McKee, 942 P.2d 494 (Colo. 1997). Stipulated agreement and recommenda- tions of suspension for six months based upon conditional admission of misconduct were war- ranted for attorney who engaged in conduct that adversely reflects on the lawyer’s ability to practice law and for violating criminal laws of a state or the United States. People v. McIntyre, 942 P.2d 499 (Colo. 1997). Stipulated agreement and recommenda- tion of suspension for 30 days based upon con- ditional admission of misconduct were war- ranted for attorney who committed unfair insurance claim settlement practices and tortious conduct in handling insurance investi- gation of fire claim that he was not competent to handle. People v. McClung, 953 P.2d 1282 (Colo. 1998). Stipulated agreement and recommenda- tion of public censure based on conditional ad- mission of misconduct was warranted where respondent neglected and made misrepresenta- tions in two separate legal matters. People v. Eagan, 902 P.2d 841 (Colo. 1995). Stipulated agreement and recommenda- tion of public censure based on conditional ad- mission of misconduct was acceptable where respondent was convicted of driving while abil- ity impaired and had also appeared in court while intoxicated on two consecutive days. People v. Coulter, 950 P.2d 176 (Colo. 1998). Stipulated agreement and recommenda- tion of public censure based on conditional ad- mission of misconduct was warranted. People v. Williams, 936 P.2d 1289 (Colo. 1997). Stipulated agreement and recommenda- tion of public censure with certain conditions and monitoring based upon conditional admis- sion of misconduct were warranted for attorney who required that his associates sign a covenant that hindered a client’s right to choose his or her own lawyer and which placed a financial hardship upon a departing associate who might not be able to represent the client if the associ- ate’s recovery would be limited to 25 percent or less of the total fee. People v. Wilson, 953 P.2d 1292 (Colo. 1998). Applied in People v. Brackett, 667 P.2d 1357 (Colo. 1983).