Search



Not a CBA Member? Join Now!
Find A Lawyer Directory
STRATUM
Find A Lawyer Directory

TCL > April 2011 Issue > Disciplinary Case Summaries

The Colorado Lawyer
April 2011
Vol. 40, No. 4 [Page  107]

© 2011 The Colorado Lawyer and Colorado Bar Association. All Rights Reserved.

All material from The Colorado Lawyer provided via this World Wide Web server is copyrighted by the Colorado Bar Association. Before accessing any specific article, click here for disclaimer information.

From the Courts
Colorado Disciplinary Cases

Disciplinary Case Summaries

The summaries of disciplinary case Opinions and Conditional Admissions of Misconduct are prepared by the Office of the Presiding Disciplinary Judge (PDJ) and are provided as a service by the Colorado Bar Association (CBA). The CBA cannot guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the summaries. The full text of the disciplinary Opinions, when published by the PDJ, follows the summaries page(s). The summaries and full-text Opinions also are accessible from the CBA website: www.cobar.org (click on "Opinions/Rules/Statutes"). Opinions, including exhibits, complaints, amended complaints, and summaries, also are available at the PDJ website, www.coloradosupremecourt.com/PDJ/pdj.htm, and on LexisNexis.®


Summaries of Decisions Issued by the PDJ

No. 10PDJ035. People v. Jensen. 01/07/2011. Attorney Suspended.

Following a sanctions hearing, a hearing board suspended Marie S. Jensen, attorney registration number 24616, from the practice of law for six months. The suspension was effective February 7, 2011.

Respondent was convicted of felony possession of a controlled substance, which constituted grounds for the imposition of discipline pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.5. Her misconduct violated Colo. RPC 8.4(b) and C.R.C.P. 251.5(b).

No. 10PDJ113. Meiklejohn v. People. 01/19/2011. Attorney Readmitted.

Following a readmission hearing, a hearing board granted Scott A. Meiklejohn readmission to the practice of law in the state of Colorado pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.29.

Petitioner provided clear and convincing evidence of his competence to practice law, his solid program of recovery from substance dependence, his remorse for his past misconduct, his active involvement in treatment and assistance to others with their addiction issues, his record of community service and involvement, and substantial changes in his personal life and character. The hearing board concluded petitioner has been rehabilitated, is professionally competent, is fit to practice law, has complied with all past court orders, and should be readmitted to the practice of law.

No. 10PDJ057. People v. Wilson-Gebhart. 01/05/2011. Attorney Suspended.

Following a sanctions hearing, the PDJ suspended Pamela Wilson-Gebhart, attorney registration number 24848, from the practice of law for one year and one day. The suspension was effective February 5, 2011.

In two cases involving motions to terminate her clients’ parental rights, respondent failed to competently represent her clients, neglected to appropriately litigate their appeals, and failed to adequately or sufficiently communicate with them about their rights, the status of their respective cases, and the consequences of legal positions she took on their behalf. Her misconduct constituted grounds for the imposition of discipline pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.5, and violated Colo. RPC 1.1, 1.2(a), 1.4(a) and (b), and 8.4(d).


Summaries of Decisions Regarding
Conditional Admission of Misconduct Issued by the PDJ

The PDJ’s approval of a Conditional Admission of Misconduct does not result in a written Opinion but only a brief Order, which does not constitute precedent. Conditional Admissions of Misconduct are public record and are available for review at the Office of the PDJ, 1560 Broadway, Ste. 675, Denver, CO 80202; (303) 866-6658; www.coloradosupremecourt.com/PDJ/pdj.htm. They also are available on LexisNexis.®

No. 10PDJ091. People v. Crossman. 01/25/2011. Attorney Suspended.

The PDJ approved a Conditional Admission of Misconduct submitted by the parties and suspended William V. Crossman, Jr., attorney registration number 01702, from the practice of law for six months, with the condition of reinstatement proceedings pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.29(c)–(e). The suspension was effective February 25, 2011.

Respondent knowingly failed to diligently represent or communicate with several clients and failed to provide adequate accountings of their fees. His misconduct constituted grounds for the imposition of discipline pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.5, and violated Colo. RPC 1.1, 1.3, 1.4(a)(3) and (4), 1.5(b) and (f), and 1.15(b) and (c).

No. 10PDJ123. People v. Klingsmith. 02/16/2011. Attorney Disbarred.

The PDJ approved a Conditional Admission of Misconduct submitted by the parties and disbarred Phil Klingsmith, attorney registration number 09802, from the practice of law. Disbarment was effective February 16, 2011.

Respondent, who served as power of attorney on behalf of two clients suffering from physical and mental disabilities, knowingly solicited more than $205,000 in loans from the two clients without taking appropriate steps to protect the clients’ interests, in view of their capacity to approve the transactions and respondent’s ability to repay the loans. His misconduct constituted grounds for the imposition of discipline pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.5, and violated Colo. RPC 1.8.

Nos. 10PDJ078 & 10PDJ127. People v. Senseney. 02/03/2011. Attorney Suspended.

The PDJ approved a Conditional Admission of Misconduct submitted by the parties and suspended David A. Senseney, attorney registration number 03928, from the practice of law for six months, all but thirty days stayed pending the successful completion of a two-year period of probation. The suspension was effective April 1, 2011.

Respondent failed to diligently represent or adequately communicate with one immigration client and failed to adequately communicate with another immigration client about the scope of his representation and the risks involved in her case, which resulted in the disclosure of her immigration status to immigration officials. Respondent also charged these clients for work not explained to them or disclosed in written fee agreements. His misconduct constituted grounds for the imposition of discipline pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.5, and violated Colo. RPC 1.2(a), 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5(a) and (b).

© 2011 The Colorado Lawyer and Colorado Bar Association. All Rights Reserved. Material from The Colorado Lawyer provided via this World Wide Web server is protected by the copyright laws of the United States and may not be reproduced in any way or medium without permission. This material also is subject to the disclaimers at http://www.cobar.org/tcl/disclaimer.cfm?year=2011.


Back