Summaries of Opinions

• Publication year: 2000
• Pages: 117
• Citation: Vol. 29 No. 6 Pg. 117

29 Colo.Law. 117 Colorado Lawyer 2000.

2000, June, Pg. 117. Summaries of Opinions

---

117

Vol. 29, No. 6, Pg. 117

The Colorado Lawyer
June 2000
Vol. 29, No. 6 [Page 117]

From the Courts
Colorado Disciplinary Cases
Summaries of Opinions

Presiding Disciplinary Judge
Appellate Discipline Commission

Summaries of Disciplinary Opinions

Summaries of opinions appear on a space-available basis. The summaries for the Presiding Disciplinary Judge and hearing board are prepared by the Office of the Presiding Disciplinary Judge, and the summaries for the Appellate Discipline Commission are prepared by the Office of the Appellate Discipline Commission. The summaries of the opinions of the Presiding Disciplinary Judge and the Appellate Discipline Commission are provided as a service by the Colorado Bar Association and are not the official language of the Opinion. The Colorado Bar Association cannot guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the summaries

Unless otherwise noted, full copies of the opinions follow the summaries pages. The summaries and full-text opinions are also available on the CBA homepage at http://www.cobar.org/tcl/index.htm

Summaries of Appeal to the Appellate Discipline Commission

In the Matter of Sheffer, No. 99AD005, 04/06/2000. Attorney Regulation

The Appellate Discipline Commission ("Commission") remanded the case to the Hearing Board ("Board"), following Regulation Counsel's concession that Mary Jody Sheffer, whom the Board had found to have committed two felonies, had not committed either felony. Sheffer had notarized various documents, using a notary seal of a former employee. To complete the jurat, Sheffer also had signed the name of the former employee. She pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in Arapahoe County, but on the facts before the Board, the Board concluded that she had committed two felonies: forgery and criminal impersonation. Regulation Counsel conceded on appeal that Sheffer had not committed the felonies, but argued that the Board's sanction, a two-year suspension, should be affirmed nonetheless because Sheffer had committed less-serious offenses. In reaching its decision, the Commission determined, notwithstanding the record before the Board, that it would be unreasonable to sustain a sanction that was based on offenses that Regulation Counsel now says Sheffer did not commit. The Commission remanded this case to permit the Board to reformulate its sanction. p.121.

In the Matter of Parsley, No. 99AD001, 04/26/2000. Attorney Regulation.

The Appellate Discipline Commission ("Commission") suspended Jeffrey A. Parsley for failing to provide competent representation, for neglecting legal matters entrusted to him, and for engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, thereby violating Colo. RPC 1.1 Colo. RPC 1.3, and Colo. RPC 8.4(d). The Commission stayed a portion of the...