Disciplinary Opinions

• Publication year: 2003
• Pages: 139

32 Colo.Law. 139 Colorado Lawyer 2003.

2003, November, Pg. 139. Disciplinary Opinions

---

139

Vol. 32, No. 11, Pg. 139

The Colorado Lawyer
November 2003
Vol. 32, No. 11 [Page 139]

From the Courts
Colorado Disciplinary Cases
Disciplinary Opinions

SUPREME COURT, STATE OF COLORADO
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN DISCIPLINE
BEFORE THE PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE

600 17th Street, Suite 510-South
Denver, Colorado 80202
Complainant

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO

Respondent

EDDIE G. DISTEL

Case Number: 03PDJ005

REPORT, DECISION AND IMPOSITION OF SANCTION

Opinion by Presiding Disciplinary Judge, Roger L. Keithley and Hearing Board Members John E. Hayes, a member of the bar, and B. LaRae Orullian, a representative of the public.

SANCTION IMPOSED: ATTORNEY DISBARRED

A Sanctions Hearing pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.15(b) was held on July 24, 2003, before the Hearing Board consisting of the Presiding Disciplinary Judge ("PDJ") Roger L. Keithley, and two Hearing Board Members, John E. Hayes, a member of the bar, and B. LaRae Orullian, a representative of the public. Kim E. Ikler, Assistant Regulation Counsel, represented the People of the State of Colorado (the "People"). Eddie G. Distel, the respondent, ("Distel") did not appear in person or by counsel.

The People filed a Complaint in this matter on January 16, 2003. The Citation and Complaint were sent by regular and certified mail to Distel on the same date. The People filed a Proof of Service on February 24, 2003, indicating that the Proof of Service shows that the Citation and the Complaint were sent to both respondent's last known address. Service was in accord with C.R.C.P. 251.32(b) and is sufficient. Distel failed to file an Answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint.

On February 24, 2003, the People moved for default on the claims set forth in the Complaint. Copies of the Motion for Default were sent to Distel at his last known address. He did not respond to the Motion for Default.

On April 10, 2003, the PDJ granted the Motion for Default as to the facts set forth in the Complaint, which were deemed admitted, and as to the claims set forth in the Complaint, which were deemed established. The PDJ's order entering default was sent to Distel at his last known address.

A Sanctions Hearing was held on July 24, 2003, before the Hearing Board. The People's exhibit 1, the Judgment and Order of the Supreme Court of Arizona, was admitted into evidence. The Hearing Board considered the exhibits, the facts established by the entry of default, and the People's argument, and made the following findings of fact, which were established by clear and convincing evidence.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Eddie G. Distel has taken and subscribed the oath of admission, was admitted to the bar of the Colorado Supreme Court on October 16, 1974, and is registered upon the official records of the Supreme Court, registration number 05727. He is subject to the jurisdiction of this Court pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.1(b).

On December 4, 2002, the Supreme Court of Arizona issued an order disbarring Distel from the practice of law in that state. The Supreme Court of Arizona found, among other misconduct, that Distel engaged in knowing conversion of client funds, trust account violations and neglect. In addition, Distel knowingly made misstatements of material fact to a tribunal. A copy of that decision is attached hereto as exhibit "A."

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND IMPOSITION OF SANCTION

The Complaint in this action seeks imposition of the same discipline under the reciprocal discipline provisions of C.R.C.P. 251.21. The same discipline that was imposed in the foreign jurisdiction shall be imposed in Colorado unless certain exceptions exist. People v. Calder, 897 P.2d 831, 832 (1995).

C.R.C.P. 251.21(d) provides in part:

At the conclusion of proceedings brought under this Rule, the Hearing Board shall issue a decision imposing the same discipline as was imposed by the foreign jurisdiction, unless it is determined by the Hearing Board that:

(1) The procedure followed in the foreign jurisdiction did not comport with requirements of due process of law;

(2) The proof upon which the foreign jurisdiction based its determination of misconduct is so infirm that the Hearing Board cannot, consistent with its duty, accept as final the determination of the foreign jurisdiction;

(3) The imposition by the Hearing Board of the same discipline as was imposed in the foreign jurisdiction would result in grave injustice; or

(4) The misconduct proved warrants that a substantially different form of discipline be imposed by the Hearing Board.

Under the provisions of C.R.C.P. 251.21(d), if the respondent attorney seeks to challenge the validity of the disciplinary order entered by the foreign jurisdiction, the attorney must file with the PDJ an Answer and a full copy of the record of the disciplinary proceedings which resulted in the imposition of that disciplinary order within twenty days after service of the Complaint. Distel neither answered the Complaint nor filed the requisite documentation to enable him to challenge the Arizona disbarment order. Accordingly, Distel is foreclosed from challenging the validity of the Arizona disbarment order.

A final adjudication in another jurisdiction of attorney misconduct constituting grounds for discipline is, for purposes of attorney disciplinary proceedings in Colorado, conclusively established. See C.R.C.P. 251.21(a). The disbarment order issued by the Supreme Court of Arizona is such a final order.

Having reviewed the order issued by the Supreme Court of Arizona, the Hearing Board finds that none of the exceptions found in C.R.C.P. 251.21(d) are applicable and it is, therefore, bound to impose the same discipline as imposed by Arizona.

ORDER

It is therefore ORDERED:

EDDIE G. DISTEL, attorney registration 05727, is DISBARRED from the practice of law in the State of Colorado effective thirty - one days from the date of this order and his name shall be stricken from the roll of attorneys licensed to practice in this state.

Eddie G. Distel is Ordered to pay the costs of these proceedings. The People shall submit a Statement of Costs within ten (10) days of the date of this Order. Respondent shall have five (5) days thereafter to submit a response thereto.

DATED THIS 24th DAY OF JULY, 2003.

(SIGNED)

____________________________________
ROGER L. KEITHLEY
PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE

(SIGNED)

___________________________________
JOHN E. HAYES

HEARING BOARD MEMBER

(SIGNED)

____________________________________
B. LARAE ORULLIAN

HEARING BOARD MEMBER

EXHIBIT A

SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA

IN THE MATTER OF A SUSPENDED MEMBER ) Supreme Court

OF THE STATE BAR OF ARIZONA ) No. SB- 02-0131-D

)

) Disciplinary Commission

) Nos. 97-2568, 98-1281,

EDDIE G. DISTEL, ) 98-1565, 99-0262, 99-0695,

Bar No. 014771 ) 99-1439, 99-1613, 00-0053,

) 00-0352, 00-1149, 00-1681

)

) JUDGMENT AND ORDER

________________________________________________ )

This matter having come on for hearing before the Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Arizona, it having duly rendered its decision and no discretionary or sua sponte review occurring,

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that EDDIE G. DISTEL, a suspended member of the State Bar of Arizona, is hereby disbarred from the practice of law, effective the date of this Judgment and Order, for conduct in violation of his duties and obligations as a lawyer, as disclosed in the commission report attached hereto as Exhibit A.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that EDDIE G. DISTEL shall pay restitution in the following amounts to the following individuals:

Rafael Suarez $ 3,100.00
Monika Halterman $ 3,000.00
Sylvia Grijalva $ 5,000.00
Sharan Morris $ 729.76
TOTAL $11,829.76

IT IF FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent shall pay in full any and all claims paid by the Client Protection Fund, not to exceed the maximum permissible payment of $100,000.

IT IF FURTHER ORDERED that respondent shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 63, Rules of the Supreme Court of Arizona, including, but not limited to, Rule 63(a), which requires that Respondent notify all of his clients, within ten (10) days from the date hereof, of his inability to represent them and that he should promptly inform this Court of his compliance with this Order as provided in Rule 63(d).

IT IF FURTHER ORDERED that EDDIE G. DISTEL shall pay the costs and expenses of these proceedings in the amount of $6,645.45, together with interest at the legal rate from the date of this judgment.

DATED this 4th day of December 2002.

NOEL K. DESSAINT, Clerk

IN THE MATTER OF A SUSPENDED MEMBER ) Supreme Court

OF THE STATE BAR OF ARIZONA ) No. SB- 02-0131-D

)

) Disciplinary Commission

) Nos. 97-2568, 98-1281,

EDDIE G. DISTEL, ) 98-1565, 99-0262, 99-0695,

Bar No. 014771 ) 99-1439, 99-1613, 00-0053,

) 00-0352, 00-1149, 00-1681

)

) DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION

________________________________________________ ) REPORT

This matter came before the Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Arizona on July 3, 2002, pursuant to Rule 53(d), Ariz. R.S. Ct., for consideration of the Hearing Officer's findings of fact, conclusions of law and recommendation filed April 22, 2002, providing for disbarment, restitution and costs.

Decision

The Commission's standard of review is set forth in Rule 53(d)2, which states that the Commission reviews questions of law de novo. In reviewing findings of fact made by a hearing officer, the...