Opinions
Publication year | 2002 |
Pages | 109 |
Citation | Vol. 31 No. 2 Pg. 109 |
2002, February, Pg. 109. Opinions
Vol. 31, No. 2, Pg. 109
The Colorado Lawyer
February 2002
Vol. 31, No. 2 [Page 109]
February 2002
Vol. 31, No. 2 [Page 109]
From the Courts
Colorado Disciplinary Cases
Opinions
Colorado Disciplinary Cases
Opinions
Case Number: 01PDJ049
Complainant
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO
Respondent
EVAN S. POWELL.
December 10, 2001
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN DISCIPLINE BEFORE THE OFFICE OF THE
PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE
REPORT, DECISION AND IMPOSITION OF SANCTION
Opinion by Presiding Disciplinary Judge Roger L. Keithley and
Hearing Board members, Sisto J. Mazza and Beth L. Krulewitch,
both members of the bar.
SANCTION IMPOSED: ONE YEAR AND ONE DAY SUSPENSION
A sanctions hearing pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.15 was held on
October 11, 2001, before the Presiding Disciplinary Judge
("PDJ") and two hearing board members, Sisto J.
Mazza and Beth L. Krulewitch, both members of the bar.
Charles E. Mortimer, Jr., Assistant Attorney Regulation
Counsel, represented the People of the State of Colorado (the
"People"). Evan Shawn Powell ("Powell"),
the respondent, did not appear either in person or by
counsel.
The Complaint in this action was filed April 27, 2001. Powell
did not file an Answer to the Complaint. On June 26, 2001,
the People filed a Motion for Default. Powell did not
respond. On July 19, 2001 the PDJ issued an Order granting
default, stating that all factual allegations set forth in
the Complaint were deemed admitted pursuant to C.R.C.P.
251.15(b), and all violations of The Rules of Professional
Conduct ("Colo. RPC") alleged in the Complaint were
deemed established.
At the sanctions hearing, exhibit 1 was offered by the People
and admitted into evidence. The PDJ and Hearing Board
considered the People's argument, the facts established
by the entry of default, the exhibit admitted, and made the
following findings of fact which were established by clear
and convincing evidence, and reached the following
conclusions of law.
I. FINDINGS OF FACT
All factual allegations set forth in the Complaint were
deemed admitted by the entry of default. The facts set forth
therein are therefore established by clear and convincing
evidence. See Complaint attached hereto as exhibit 1. The
Order entering default also granted default as to the
violations of The Rules of Professional Conduct.
II. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The respondent has taken and subscribed the oath of
admission, was admitted to the bar of this court on October
15, 1992, and is registered upon the official records of this
court, registration No. 22148. He is subject to the
jurisdiction of this court in these disciplinary proceedings.
Claims I and II
On January 12, 2000, Jovoni Mercado ("Mercado")
hired Powell to represent her in a dissolution of marriage
action, and paid him a retainer of $300. Powell did not file
the petition for dissolution of marriage on Mercado's
behalf until March 26, 2000, and thereafter took no other
action on her case. Consequently, Powell violated Colo. RPC
1.3(a lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and
promptness in representing a client) by neglecting
Mercado's legal matter. Powell also violated Colo. RPC
1.4(a)(a lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about
the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable
requests for information) by failing to communicate with
Mercado, by failing to keep Mercado reasonably informed about
the status of her legal matter and failing to comply with
Mercado's reasonable requests for information, despite
Mercado's repeated attempts to communicate with Powell.
Claims III and IV
In February 1999, Norma Eastridge ("Eastridge")
hired Powell to assist her in acquiring title to three
separate retirement assets that had been awarded to her in a
dissolution of marriage action and to represent her interests
in connection with marital property in a bankruptcy
proceeding filed by her former spouse. When Eastridge
contacted Powell on November 12, 1999, Powell had done
nothing on Eastridge's legal matters. After her meeting
with Powell in November 1999, Eastridge called Powell four to
five times a month and received only voice mail. On November
1, 2000, Eastridge hired a new attorney to represent her.
Powell violated Colo. RPC 1.3(a lawyer shall act with
reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client)
by failing to file an adversary proceeding with regard to the
bankruptcy matter filed by Eastridge's former spouse, and
by failing to prepare documentation to divide two retirement
plans between Eastridge and her former spouse. Powell
violated Colo. RPC 1.4(a)(a lawyer shall keep a client
reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly
comply with reasonable requests for information) by failing
to keep Eastridge reasonably informed about the status of her
legal matters and failing to promptly comply with
Eastridge's reasonable requests for information.
Claims V, VI, VII and VIII
In 1997, Jim Lottig ("Lottig") retained Powell on a
contingency fee basis to sue certain individuals who built
Lottig's residence. Powell commenced the civil action and
engaged in some investigation and discovery. In May 2000
Lottig settled with one of the defendants, and the civil
action against the other defendants continued.1By September
2000, Lottig had not heard from Powell concerning...
To continue reading
Request your trial