People v. Bengert, 94SA368
| Decision Date | 29 November 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. 94SA368,94SA368 |
| Citation | 885 P.2d 241 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Complainant, v. Willis Ray BENGERT, Attorney-Respondent. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Linda Donnelly, Disciplinary Counsel, John S. Gleason, Asst. Disciplinary Counsel, Denver, for complainant.
Willis Ray Bengert, pro se.
This is a reciprocal attorney disciplinary proceeding brought pursuant to C.R.C.P. 241.17(d) (). The respondent 1 and the assistant disciplinary counsel entered into a stipulation, agreement, and conditional admission of misconduct. C.R.C.P. 241.18. An inquiry panel of the Supreme Court Grievance Committee approved the stipulation, with the recommendation that the respondent be suspended from the practice of law for one year and one day and be assessed costs. We accept the stipulation and the recommendation of the inquiry panel.
The parties stipulated that the respondent was suspended from the practice of law in California, effective May 7, 1993. See In re Bengert, No. S031049 (Cal. Apr. 7, 1993) (order of suspension). In a reciprocal disciplinary proceeding brought in Missouri, the respondent was suspended in Missouri until he obtained reinstatement from the California Supreme Court. See In re Bengert, No. 76024 (Mo. Oct. 21, 1993). The respondent was subsequently reinstated in California on November 16, 1993.
In March 1988, the respondent became involved in a relationship and agreement with a nonlawyer which, in effect, constituted the sharing of legal fees with a nonlawyer, contrary to DR 3-102(A) (); and the formation of a partnership with a nonlawyer, contrary to DR 3-103(A) (). The respondent has also admitted that his conduct violated DR 9-102(A) ().
The respondent allowed the nonlawyer to exercise control over client settlement funds, and the nonlawyer embezzled approximately $120,000 of such funds. When the respondent discovered the embezzlement, he terminated the relationship with the nonlawyer, and began paying restitution to the victims. The assistant disciplinary counsel has stipulated that there are currently no unsettled claims, and that the respondent has closed his personal injury office.
In a reciprocal discipline case such as this, we generally impose the same discipline that was imposed in the foreign jurisdiction unless one of four exceptions exist. People v. Nash, 873 P.2d 764, 765 & n. 1 (Colo.1994); People v. Mattox, 862 P.2d 276, 277 (Colo.1993); C.R.C.P. 241.17(d)(1)-(4). 2 The California Supreme Court's order of suspension provided in part that the respondent "be suspended from the practice of law for a period of two years, that execution of suspension be stayed, and that he be placed on probation for three years on condition that he be actually suspended for six months." The respondent was also ordered to pay restitution and pass a professional responsibility examination.
Colorado law does not provide for the conditional suspension of a period of suspension, or for probation. See C.R.C.P. 241.7; Nash, 873 P.2d at 765. The parties have stipulated, however, that suspension for one year and one day is an appropriate disciplinary sanction under the facts of this case. The assistant disciplinary counsel indicates that a suspension for one year and one day, together with the requirements for reinstatement contained in C.R.C.P. 241.22(b)-(d), will assure that the respondent has complied with the conditions of his California suspension, including the probationary period. We agree and accordingly accept the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bebo Const. Co. v. MATTOX & O'BRIEN, PC
...and (b). Violations of these rules subjected the attorney to appropriate disciplinary proceedings. Colo. RPC, Scope; see People v. Bengert, 885 P.2d 241 (Colo.1994). An agreement entered into in violation of the above Rules is unenforceable and void. See Network Affiliates, Inc. v. Robert E......
-
People v. Easley, 98SA77
...a duty owed as a professional, and causes injury or potential injury to a client, the public, or the legal system." See People v. Bengert, 885 P.2d 241, 242 (Colo.1994) (in reciprocal discipline case, lawyer suspended for one year and one day for sharing fees with a nonlawyer, among other m......
-
Marketing Plus Referrals for a Fee - Feeder Operations by Any Other Name - July 2007 - Professional Conduct and Legal Ethics
...supra note 6. 8. Abstract 01/02-03, supra note 6. 9. See CBA Formal Opinion 98, supra note 2. 10. See id. 11. See People v. Bengert, 885 P.2d 241, (Colo. 1994) (suspending lawyer for one year and one day for, inter alia, sharing fees with a nonlawyer and forming a prohibited partnership wit......