Assistant Regulation Counsel Presiding Disciplinary Judge. cc: James C. Coyle Hon. Roger Keithley. Suzanne Shell. Elbert, Co 80906

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Assistant Regulation Counsel Presiding Disciplinary Judge. cc: James C. Coyle Hon. Roger Keithley. Suzanne Shell. Elbert, Co 80906"

Debra Hubbard
5 years ago
Views:

1 _: t Suzanne Shell Assistant Regulation Counsel Presiding Disciplinary Judge James C. Coyle Hon. Roger Keithley COURT cc: and the same hereby is, ACCEPTED AND MADE THE ORDER Of THIS IT IS THIS DAY ORDERED that said Recommendation shall be, advised in the premises, Stipulation filed in the above cause, and now being sufficiently Upon consideration of the Recommendation to Accept DeputyrL [i 3Ofll ified ft be a fuii,true and correcicopy Elbert, Co State of Co!orado Eastonville Rd. BY THE COURT, EN BANC, OCTOBER 25, 2001

2 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, Respondent: SUZANNE SHELL. RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPT STIPULATION On July 17, 2001, the Supreme Court entered an Order remanding this matter to the Presiding Disciplinary Judge ( PDJ ) for determination of facts and recommendation regarding whether the respondent should be enjoined from the unauthorized practice of law and whether the court should assess the costs and expenses of theses proceedings against respondent. The Order also directed the PDJ to conduct the necessary proceedings to determine the facts surrounding respondent s alleged contemptuous conduct and make further recommendations to the Supreme Court. The PDJ conducted several hearings regarding both the injunctive and contempt matters. On September 24, 2001, the respondent filed a Motion to Accept Stipulation and Stay Pending Resolution. The motion included as an attachment a Stipulation, Agreement and Affidavit Consenting to an Order of Injunction signed by the respondent. The petitioner filed a Response to Respondent s Motion to Accept Stipulation and a Request for a Forthwith Hearing. The Response filed by the petitioner included as an attachment a copy of the same Stipulation, Agreement and Affidavit Consenting to an Order of Injunction as that attached to respondent s motion but signed by both the respondent and petitioner. A copy of the Stpulation, Agreement and Affidavit Consenting to an Order of Injunction signed by both of the parties is attached hereto. The petitioner also filed a Request for a Forthwith Hearing. The PDJ scheduled and held a forthwith hearing on the respondent s Motion to Accept Stipulation and Stay Pending Resolution of October 1, The petitioner s Motion for Forthwith Hearing requested that the PDJ confirm that the respondent understood the stipulation and entered into it voluntarily. The PDJ made inquiries of respondent at the hearing. The respondent, although expressing some confusion about the meaning of the unauthorized practice of law credibly stated that she knew that the law of

3 resolution of the dispute. With such recognition, respondent has knowingly injunctive evidentiary proceedings be stayed pending a decision by the and voluntarily signed the Stipulation. Supreme Court upon this recommendation. accept the Stipulation, Agreement and Affidavit Consenting to an Order of Injunction, issue the requested injunction against Suzanne Shell, award costs contempt proceedings. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge recommends that the Supreme Court RECOMMENDATION $551.15, payable in 120 days and the dismissal of contempt proceedings. issuance of an Injunction against Suzanne Shell prohibiting her from the unauthorized practice of law, an award of costs against her in the amount of Stipulation by the Supreme Court. $ as costs in this matter within 120 days after the acceptance of the and neglect proceeding and by drafting pleadings on behalf of such clients without the supervision of an attorney. (Paragraph 5(a) of the Stipulation). Respondent did not receive any fees from the parents on those matters. Such conduct constitutes the unauthorized practice of law. Denver Bar Association remanded to the PDJ. Respondent acknowledges in the Stipulation, Agreement practice law that, notwithstanding her lack of licensure, she engaged in the practice of law by providing legal advice to parents in at least one dependency and Affidavit Consenting to an Order of Injunction that she is not licensed to Injunction is intended to resolve both the injunctive and contempt proceedings The Stipulation, Agreement and Affidavit Consenting to an Order of stipulated request that all further proceedings on both the contempt and At the conclusion of the October 1, 2001 hearing, the PDJ granted the v. Public Utilities Commission, 391 P.2d 467 (Cob. 1964). The Stipulation also provides that respondent will pay the sum of The Stipulation executed by the parties to this action requests the to the petitioner in the amount of $ payable in 120 days and dismiss the 2

4 Suzanne Shell ia First Class Mail & ia Facsimile (719) Respondent Copies to: Colorado Supreme Court Mac Danford ia Hand Delivery Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel % James C. Coyle ia Hand Delivery

9.L Eli itt 08 I i F. 4fl I THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO Fai Number: (303) 8935302 Phone Number: (303) 8938121, ext. 328 Denver, CO 80202 Attorney for Petitioner :.

Coyle 4114970 SUZANNE SHELL I Petitioner: DISCIPLINARY JUDGE AS HEARING MASTER Respondent: 600 1 7th Street, Suite QUotith r r 1 1 C PRACTICE OF LAW BEFORE THE PRESIDING REGULATIO 1.

5 9.L Eli itt 08 I i F. 4fl I THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO Fai Number: (303) Phone Number: (303) , ext. 328 Denver, CO Attorney for Petitioner :. Assistant Regulation Càunsel James C. Coyle SUZANNE SHELL I Petitioner: DISCIPLINARY JUDGE AS HEARING MASTER Respondent: th Street, Suite QUotith r r 1 1 C PRACTICE OF LAW BEFORE THE PRESIDING REGULATIO 1. The respondent resides at Eastonville Road, Elbert, C.R.C.? This stipulation was entered into as a result of a settlement. Dubofsky.. conference facilitated by former Colorado Supreme Court Justice Jean same to the Colorado Supreme Court for an order of injunction pursuant to affidavit consenting to an order of injunction (stipu1ationw) and submit the respondent s counsel, enter into the following stipulation, agreement, and Regulation Counsel, Suzanne Shell, the respondent, and Paul Grant, On this day of September, 2001, James C. Coyle, Assistant AN ORDER OF INJ1flCTION STIP1)LATION, AGREEMENT AN]) AFFIDAIT CONSENTING TO Case Number: 018A136 ATTQRNE ACOURTUSE ONLY A ORIGINAL P nl,. J* c:lj 4

6 2 supervision an unauthorized. not I. i1jraft ; a. of and crossexamine the witnesses presented. by the pçtitioner. At any such have the right to be represented by.cqunsel, present evidence, call witnesses, referenced petition for injunction. At any such hearing, the respondent would without the supervisio of..an pmey; of an attorney: Z d. she cannot app or interet law for another individual s siation she cannot prepare cases for trial for another without the without the supeision of an aorne.. legal documents on behalf of another individual which she believes is appropriate for that individual, unless she is of an attomfy b. she cannot choose legal documents on behalf of another individual she cannot give legal advice to another individual; 312 P.2d 1011 (1957). The respondent thus understands that practice of law uilesithe C SpziCourt hasautho±edsuch action 391 P.2d 467 (1964). In addition, preparation of legal d&uments for others by ith1ihtsäwdtit1cs See DeTwer Bar n P U C, 15%. COIQ....: another and/or counseling, advising and assisting that person in connecbcn epresentative in protecting, enforcin,g or defending the legal nghts and duties. includes but is... practice of law in Colorado. The unauthorized pradce of law unlicensed person, other than solely as a scrivener, is the unauthorized limited to an unlicensed person s actions as a. Committee have exclusive jurisdiction to determine what constitutes the in a specific circumstance. Title Guarantee v. Denver Bar Ass n, 136 Cob. 423,. 4. The Colorado Supreme Court and its Unauthorized Practice of Law.. respondent waives that iht Nohetheless, having full kriow1eige of the right to. such a formal hearing, the required to prove :.the.. charges, contained, in the petition for injunction.. formal hearing, the petitipneii..ould.have the burden of proof and woultbe Court regarding the unauthorized practice of law. The respondent 3. The respondent is familiar with the rules of the Colorado Supreme bnirgs decision, and the respondent afñrms there has been no coercion or other lenience in the abo acknowledges the right to a full and complete evidentiaiy hearing on the above

3 As 5. The i::, _ of any laws involving dependency and neglect and other legal and public policy _ to another individual s situation without the supervision of an attorney.

7 3 As 5. The i::, _ of any laws involving dependency and neglect and other legal and public policy _ to another individual s situation without the supervision of an attorney. The law; or expressing her political views and petitioning the government for matter unless specifically all redress of grievances. She is only precluded from applying that understanding respondent is also not precluded from advocating for improvement and reform these matters. b. The respondent did not receive any fees from the parents on without the supervision of an attorney. proceeding, and by drafting pleadings on behalf of such.cients legal advice to parents in at least one dependency and neglect that she engaged in the unauthorized practice of law by providing respondent now understands that such belief was incorrect and of attorney and United States Supreme Court case law. The practice of law based upon her understanding of sttutnry powers that she was acting in goodfaith and not engaging in unauthorized a.. The respondent believed at fl times relevant herein and conclusions:, respondent and the petitioner stipulate to the following facts eualffications under the Cob. :Rules of Evidence.. correspondence which sets forth her understanding of the present status of a ir. no way is respondent precluded from publishing any book, article or statute. rctitution froxzi this respondent for loes incurred by clients or third parties for refund of any and all fees paid by clients to the respondent, and for: chosen not to proceed on its claims for attorneys fees against this respondent, allegations contained in claims I through II of the petition. The people have part of the stipulation, the people agree to dismiss the specific factuai factual basis for entering into this stipulation for an order of injunction. 6. The parties adopt those facts stated above in paragraph 5 as the ;;r as an expert thcss in dependency aid neglect matters, subject to appropriate individual s legal rights and dute Respondent is not precluded from acting and counseling, athrising and as1stmg another in connection with that other.ssues, she is.only precluded from acting as a legal representative of another 1.,4.

4 Attorney 1 ext. 328 2001, by Suzanne Shell. Sub,cribd and sworn to before me trns Suzdr{ne Shell, Respondent that they have read and reviewed the abo.,. entered enjoining The respondent from the unauthorized practice of law, and Suzanne Shell the respondent.

8 4 Attorney 1 ext , by Suzanne Shell. Sub,cribd and sworn to before me trns Suzdr{ne Shell, Respondent that they have read and reviewed the abo.,. entered enjoining The respondent from the unauthorized practice of law, and Suzanne Shell the respondent...jw i4 REC(ThThIENDATJON FOR AND CONSENT TO ORDER OF INJUNCTION of the stipulation by the Colorado Supreme Court. costs and administrative costs in the sum of $ (a reduction of $257.80).7... rst to C.R.C.? , the respondent aees to pay the as incurred in conjunction with this matter within 120 days after the acceptance Based on the foregoing, the, parties hereto recommend that an order be 1 A petitoner s ahomey, James C Coyle, acknowkdge by signing this dpcument requinngthat the respondent pay costs in the amount of $ and tl?,e

Presiding Disciplinary Judge are Approved. Respondent is ENJOINED. from the Unauthorized Practice of Law.

Presiding Disciplinary Judge are Approved. Respondent is ENJOINED. from the Unauthorized Practice of Law. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, ON V. Respondent: GOLDA TORRES-HARVEY OR1ER OF COURT Upon consideration of the Report Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law Pursuant to C.R.C.?. 235 & 236, filed in the