People v. Allyn. 10PDJ068. February 7, Attorney Regulation. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge disbarred Glenn B. Allyn (Attorney Registration

Similar documents
People v. Crews, 05PDJ049. March 6, Attorney Regulation. Following a sanctions hearing, the Presiding Disciplinary Judge disbarred Respondent

People v. Michael Scott Collins. 14PDJ042. December 2, 2014.

People v. Romo-Vejar, 05PDJ057. March 31, Attorney Regulation. Following a sanctions hearing, a Hearing Board publicly censured Respondent

People v. Alster. 07PDJ056. March 12, Attorney Regulation. Following a Sanctions Hearing, the Presiding Disciplinary Judge suspended Respondent

People v. Evanson. 08PDJ082. August 4, Attorney Regulation. Following a default sanctions hearing pursuant to C.R.C.P (b), the Presiding

People v. Ringler. 12PDJ087. June 21, Attorney Regulation. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge disbarred Victoria Lynne Ringler (Attorney

People v. Bigley. 10PDJ100. May 17, Attorney Regulation. Following a sanctions hearing, the Presiding Disciplinary Judge suspended Michael F.

People v. Richard O. Schroeder. 17PDJ046. January 9, 2018.

People v. Tolentino. 11PDJ085, consolidated with 12PDJ028. August 16, Attorney Regulation. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge disbarred Gregory

OPINION AND ORDER IMPOSING SANCTIONS. Sanction Imposed: Two Year and Three Month Suspension

People v. Jerold R. Gilbert. 17PDJ044. January 8, 2018.

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS

People v. David William Beale. 16PDJ066. February 9, 2017.

OPINION AND ORDER IMPOSING SANCTIONS

People v. Kolhouse. 13PDJ001. August 13, Attorney Regulation. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge suspended Nicole M. Kolhouse (Attorney

People v. Leland Thomas Kintzele Jr. 15PDJ041. August 25, 2017.

REPORT, DECISION AND IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS

People v. Lindsey Scott Topper. 16PDJ004. July 27, 2016.

People v. William F. Levings. 16PDJ082. April 17, 2017.

Opinion by Presiding Disciplinary Judge Roger L. Keithley and Hearing Board Members Helen R. Stone and Paul Willumstad, both members of the bar.

Opinion by Presiding Disciplinary Judge Roger L. Keithley and Hearing Board members, Daniel A. Vigil and Mickey W. Smith, both members of the bar.

People v. Biddle, 07PDJ024. December 17, Attorney Regulation. Following a sanctions hearing, the Presiding Disciplinary Judge suspended Grafton

People v. Jerry R. Atencio. 16PDJ077. April 14, 2017.

People v. Mascarenas. 11PDJ008. September 27, Attorney Regulation. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge disbarred Steven J. Mascarenas (Attorney

People v. Varen Craig Belair. 17PDJ060. February 12, 2018.

People v. Bill Condon. 16PDJ050. December 23, 2016.

DECISION RE: SANCTIONS PURSUANT TO C.R.C.P (b)

Opinion by Presiding Disciplinary Judge Roger L. Keithley and Hearing Board members, Annita M. Menogan and Laird T. Milburn, both members of the bar.

People v. Kevin D. Heupel. 17PDJ005. July 11, 2017.

APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION TO PRACTICE PENDING ADMISSION PURSUANT TO C.R.C.P

People v. Espinoza, No. 00PDJ044 (consolidated with 00PDJ051) 1/30/01. Attorney Regulation. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge ( PDJ ) and Hearing

RULE CHANGE 2015(02) COLORADO RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CHAPTER 18 Rules 205.3, 205.5, 205.6, 224, and 227. CHAPTER 20 Rules 251.1, 260.2, and

Following a hearing, a hearing board disbarred James Michael Zarlengo (attorney registration number 12987). The disbarment took effect March 10, 2016.

Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department D55582 M/htr

People v. Kem W. Swarts. 17PDJ038. March 1, 2018.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY : : : : : : : : : :

I Colorado Supreme Court 101 West Colfax Avenue, Suite 800 Denver, CO 80202

People v. Smith. 10PDJ103. April 20, Attorney Regulation. Following a hearing, a Hearing Board dismissed the complaint against Matthew Smith

CHAPTER 20 RULE DISCIPLINE AND DISABILITY: POLICY JURISDICTION

People v. Cabral. 10PDJ077. February 3, Attorney Regulation. The Hearing Board suspended Alfonso S. Cabral (Attorney Registration Number 18328)

SUPREME COURT, STATE OF COLORADO

People v. Ken Jones. 17PDJ077. May 23, 2018.

OPINION AND ORDER DENYING REINSTATEMENT

APPENDIX A Affidavit in Support of Application to Resign While Proceeding or Investigation is Pending INSTRUCTIONS An application pursuant to section

APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION JUDGE ADVOCATE PURSUANT TO C.R.C.P

Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Uzoma C. Obi No. AG 11, September Term, 2005

People v. Chambers, 06PDJ036. December 26, Attorney Regulation. Following a hearing pursuant to C.R.C.P , a Hearing Board publicly

To the Honorable Chief Justice and Assoc~iate Justices of. Pursuant to R ~. 1:20-4(f), the District IX Ethics Committee

BAR OF GUAM ETHICS COMMITTEE RULES OF PROCEDURE - DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

ii (oio Upon consideration of the Petition for Injunction, the Order to Show Cause,

IN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WYOMING

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA (Before a Referee)

REPORT, DECISION AND IMPOSITION OF SANCTION

SUPREME COURT, STATE OF COLORADO

To the Honorable Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of New Jersey. This matter came before us on a certification of default

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA (Before a Referee) No. SC Complainant, The Florida Bar File v. No ,577(17J) REPORT OF REFEREE


Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

Rules of Procedure TABLE OF CONTENTS

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. No. 96-BG A Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia

Upon consideration of the Report of Hearing Master Pursuant to C.R.C.P.

RULES OF THE STATE BAR OF YAP. Table of Contents. Statement of Purpose and Policy 1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA ANSWER BRIEF

SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN

[SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) ARE UNCHANGED]

District of Columbia Court of Appeals Board on Professional Responsibility. Board Rules

: No Disciplinary Docket No. 3. No. 39 DB : Attorney Registration No : (Philadelphia) ORDER

of Court and the Report of Hearing Master Pursuant to C.R.C.P. 236(a) filed in the

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. TFB File No ,427(8B) REPORT OF REFEREE

l1o SEP Upon consideration of the Petition for Injunction, the Order and Rule to

People v. Trogani. 08PDJ007. November 18, Attorney Regulation. Following a hearing pursuant to C.R.C.P , a Hearing Board suspended Lari

ORIGINAL LOUISIANA ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY BOARD IN RE: ROY JOSEPH RICHARD, JR. NUMBER: 14-DB-051 RECOMMENDATION TO THE LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT

Steven M. Mezrow, you stand before the Disciplinary Board, your

Supreme Court of Florida

LOUISIANA ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY BOARD IN RE: KEISHA M. JONES-JOSEPH NUMBER: 14-DB-035 RECOMMENDATION TO THE LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT INTRODUCTION

Rules for Qualified & Court-Appointed Parenting Coordinators

Don t Leave Without Your Ethics. Christopher A. Guetti, Flink Smith Law LLC

2013 CO 29. No. 12SA71, In the Matter of David Jerome Greene Attorney discipline Claim preclusion Identity of claims Same criminal episode.

RULE 19 APPEALS TO THE CAREER SERVICE HEARING OFFICE (Effective January 10, 2018; Rule Revision Memo 33D)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS

The Anatomy of a Complaint

and now being sufficiently advised in the premises, IT IS ORDERED that the Respondent, L. Tod Schlosser, d/b/a The Law

1. Admission to the Bar. A lawyer is qualified for admission to the bar of the district if the lawyer meets the following requirements:

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. Nos. 07-BG-254 and 07-BG Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals (Bar No.

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY COMMITTEE CANDOR TO THE COURT AND CIVILITY RULES: ETHICAL ISSUES OR PROFESSIONALISM

Supreme Court of Florida

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION FOR FILING AND REPLYING TO REQUESTS FOR MEDIATION OR ARBITRATION (1) The North Shore-Barrington Association of

mail to respondent s last known office address in Camden, New Jersey. The returned

THE NEW GRIEVANCE SYSTEM AND HOW TO AVOID IT. BETTY BLACKWELL Chair, Commission for Lawyer Discipline Standing Committee of The State Bar

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA (Before a Referee) No. SC Complainant, The Florida Bar File v. No ,295(11L) REPORT OF REFEREE

ORDER OF COURT. Upon consideration of the Order entering default Judgment Pursuant to

PUBLISHED AS A PUBLIC SERVICE BY THE OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA AT RICHMOND IN THE MATTER OF SUPREME COURT RULES, PART 6, IV, PARAGRAPH RECIPROCAL DISCIPLINE PETITION

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION FOR FILING AND REPLYING TO REQUESTS FOR MEDIATION OR ARBITRATION

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA NO B-1077 IN RE: RAYMOND CHARLES BURKART III ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA (Before a Referee)

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA NO B-1043 IN RE: MARK G. SIMMONS ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING

adequately communicate with a client, in violation of RPC 1.3 and RPC 1.4(a). In the

MISSOURI S LAWYER DISCIPLINE SYSTEM

Transcription:

People v. Allyn. 10PDJ068. February 7, 2011. Attorney Regulation. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge disbarred Glenn B. Allyn (Attorney Registration No. 25428), effective March 10, 2011. Allyn was disbarred by the New York Supreme Court for failing to comply with disciplinary rules related to business relationships with clients, escrow accounts, and handling client funds. His misconduct was tantamount to violations of Colo. RPC 1.15 and Colo. RPC 8.4(c) and constituted grounds for the imposition of reciprocal discipline pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.21(a).

SUPREME COURT, STATE OF COLORADO ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN DISCIPLINE BEFORE THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE 1560 BROADWAY, SUITE 675 DENVER, CO 80202 Complainant: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO Case Number: 10PDJ068 Respondent: GLENN B. ALLYN DECISION AND ORDER IMPOSING RECIPROCAL DISCIPLINE PURSUANT TO C.R.C.P. 251.21(e) This matter is before the Presiding Disciplinary Judge ( the Court ) on Complainant s Motion for Determination of a Question of Law Regarding Sanctions and to Vacate Sanctions Hearing filed by Adam J. Espinosa, Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel ( the People ), on November 12, 2010. Glenn B. Allyn ( Respondent ) did not file a response to the motion and the Court granted it on November 16, 2010. The Court issues the following Decision and Order Imposing Reciprocal Discipline Pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.21(e). I. ISSUE AND SANCTION The Court may impose the same discipline as imposed by a foreign jurisdiction if the People do not seek substantially different discipline and if the respondent does not challenge the order on any of the grounds set forth in the rules. Respondent did not challenge his disbarment by the New York Supreme Court for failing to comply with disciplinary rules related to business relationships with clients, escrow accounts, and handling client funds. Accordingly, the Court disbars Respondent from the practice of law. II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY The People filed a citation and complaint in this matter on June 21, 2010. On July 8, 2010, the People mailed the citation and complaint to Respondent at his home address, 14 Crescent Dr., Elmsford, NY 10523. Respondent personally signed for receipt of the citation and complaint at his home address on July 26, 2010. The People filed a Proof of Service of Citation and Complaint on July 29, 2010. 2

On August 27, 2010, the People filed Complainant s Motion for Default. Respondent failed to respond to the motion and the Court granted it on September 30, 2010. The facts and rule violations contained in the complaint have therefore been established by clear and convincing evidence. 1 III. ESTABLISHED FACTS AND RULE VIOLATIONS The Court hereby adopts and incorporates by reference the factual background of this case fully detailed in the admitted complaint. 2 Respondent took and subscribed the Oath of Admission and gained admission to the Bar of the Colorado Supreme Court on April 21, 1995. He is registered upon the official records, Attorney Registration No. 25428, and is subject to the jurisdiction of the Court pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.1. On April 22, 2010, the Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department ( New York Supreme Court ) entered its Opinion & Order disbarring Respondent from the practice of law. 3 The disciplinary case came before the New York Supreme Court after thirty-seven charges alleged by the State of New York Grievance Committee for the Ninth Judicial District ( Grievance Committee ) against Respondent had been sustained by the Special Referee at hearings on July 15, 2008, and October 21, 2008. Subsequently, the Grievance Committee moved the New York Supreme Court to confirm the Special Referee s report and to impose discipline. After a hearing, the New York Supreme Court concluded that the Special Referee properly found that the charges against Respondent had been proven by a preponderance of the credible evidence, and as such, granted the Grievance Committee s motion to confirm the Special Referee s report. The New York Supreme Court then considered evidence and testimony regarding the appropriate level of discipline to impose and disbarred Respondent, effective April 22, 2010. Respondent did not notify the People he had been disbarred from the practice of law as required by C.R.C.P. 251.21(b). The New York Supreme Court disbarred Respondent for violating several ethical rules related to a business relationship he had entered into with a client and related to his New York State Interest on Lawyer Account ( IOLA ) and an escrow account. The violations involved three separate transactions. 1 See People v. Richards, 748 P.2d 341 (Colo. 1987); C.R.C.P. 251.15(b). See also C.R.C.P. 251.21(a) ( Except as otherwise provided by these Rules, a final adjudication in another jurisdiction of misconduct constituting grounds for discipline of an attorney shall, for purpose of proceedings pursuant to these Rules, conclusively establish such misconduct. ) 2 See the People s complaint in 10PDJ068 for further detailed findings of fact. 3 See Exhibit 1 to the People s Complaint filed on June 21, 2010. 3

First, Respondent violated ethical rules related to the development of a business relationship with a client where Respondent funded the client s magazine publication. 4 Second, Respondent violated ethical rules related to the handling of the Law Office of Glenn B. Allyn IOLA account when he failed to properly title and identify his IOLA account, failed to maintain required bookkeeping records, disbursed escrow checks to cash, commingled personal and/or business funds with client funds, and disbursed funds on deposits in the IOLA account to various business in which he and/or both he and his family members were principals. Finally, Respondent violated ethical rules related to the handling of the Allyn, Hausner & Montanile s escrow account when he failed to maintain required bookkeeping records, disbursed escrow checks to cash, disbursed funds on deposits for personal and/or business purposes, made undocumented loans to various businesses in which he and/or both he and his family members were principals, commingled personal funds with client funds, disbursed funds held in trust for the benefit of a particular client without proper documentation, and failed to safeguard funds entrusted to him as a fiduciary resulting in a negative balance. Respondent s misconduct related to his IOLA and escrow account is tantamount to violations of Colo. RPC 1.15 and Colo. RPC 8.4(c). Further, the New York Supreme Court adopted a finding from the Special Referee that his conduct demonstrated a weak understanding of the disciplinary rules related to escrow accounts and the handling of client funds. IV. SANCTIONS If the People do not seek substantially different discipline and if the respondent does not challenge the order... the Presiding Disciplinary Judge may, without a hearing or a Hearing Board, issue a decision imposing the same discipline as imposed by the foreign jurisdiction. 5 As set forth in greater detail above, the New York Supreme Court disbarred Respondent from the practice of law for his misconduct. The People seek the same discipline imposed by the New York Supreme Court and Respondent has not challenged the challenged the order in these proceedings. Accordingly, the Court concludes that disbarment is the appropriate sanction in this case. 4 Id. 5 C.R.C.P. 251.21(e). 4

The Court therefore ORDERS: V. ORDER 1. Glenn B. Allyn, Attorney Registration No. 25428, is hereby DISBARRED from the practice of law. The disbarment SHALL become effective thirty-one days from the date of this order upon the issuance of an Order and Notice of Disbarment by the Court and in the absence of a stay pending appeal pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.27(h). 2. Respondent SHALL file any post-hearing motion or application for stay pending appeal with the Court on or before Tuesday, February 22, 2011. No extensions of time will be granted. 3. Respondent SHALL pay the costs of these proceedings. The People shall submit a Statement of Costs within fifteen (15) days of the date of this order. Respondent shall have ten (10) days within which to respond. DATED THIS 7 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2011. WILLIAM R. LUCERO PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE Copies to: Adam J. Espinosa Via Hand Delivery Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel Glenn B. Allyn Respondent 14 Crescent Dr. Elmsford, NY 10523 Susan Festag Colorado Supreme Court Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery 5