People v. Klein, 25562
| Decision Date | 15 September 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 25562,25562 |
| Citation | 179 Colo. 408,500 P.2d 1181 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado v. Ben KLEIN, Attorney-Respondent. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Duke W. Dunbar, Atty. Gen., John P. Moore, Deputy Atty. Gen., L. James Arthur, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for the People.
Rice & Rice, William L. Rice, Clanahan, Tanner, Downing & Knowlton, Richard H. Plock, Jr., Denver, for attorney-respondent.
This matter arises from a complaint filed by the Attorney General with the Grievance Committee of the Supreme Court of the State of Colorado against Ben Klein, an attorney duly licensed to practice law in Colorado. On December 2nd and 3rd, 1971, the Committee held a formal hearing on the complaint. Therafter the Attorney General filed a supplemental complaint against respondent. The hearing was reconvened on May 6, 1972.
The Committee made the following findings: On April 17, 1970, an attorney wrote the Denver Bar Association Grievance Committee, complaining that respondent had delayed in handling two claims of a client and that respondent had failed to turn the client's files over to him. Respondent was advised of the complaint. He replied by letter, claiming an attorney's lien on the files for failure of the client to pay certain attorney's fees. Enclosed with the reply letter were what purported to be carbon copies of letters to the client containing demands for payment and, among other things, accusing the client of a failure to cooperate. The client denied that he ever received any of these letters (except one, which is not relevant here).
At the December, 1971 hearing, respondent testified that he recalled signing the originals of the letters to the client and that the originals would have been mailed in the normal course of business on or shortly after the date on the carbons. The Committee found that this testimony was false and was known by the respondent to be false. Evidence from a documents expert showed that the carbon copies (dated between July, 1968 and December, 1969) were typed on a typewriter which was not shipped to respondent until February 26, 1970.
The respondent further testified that he had mailed bills for unpaid fees to the client on several occasions. However, his explanation for the absence of any file copies of these bills was found by the Committee to be false.
After the December hearing, the Attorney General filed a supplemental complaint charging the respondent with manufacturing evidence and with giving false testimony under oath. Respondent answered the supplemental complaint by denying the charges.
On May 6, 1972, the Committee hearing was reconvened. At this time, respondent offered the Committee a written statement requesting permission to withdraw his answer to the supplemental complaint and admitting that he had prepared false carbon copies of correspondence to the client and that he had testified falsely to the Committee concerning these letters. The respondent...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Klein v. U.S.
...Supreme Court Grievance Committee in defense of pending allegations of professional misconduct. See People v. Klein, 179 Colo. 408, 500 P.2d 1181 (1972) (en banc) (Klein I ). In 1988, after various proceedings, the Colorado Supreme Court granted Klein's petition for reinstatement to the pra......
-
People v. Susman
...Cal.Rptr. 313, 505 P.2d 1369 (1973). The respondent's actions in this case are similar to those which we condemned in People v. Klein, 179 Colo. 408, 500 P.2d 1181 (1972); See also People v. Heald, 123 Colo. 390, 229 P.2d 665 (1951). In our view, the respondent's misconduct goes to the foun......
-
Klein v. C.I.R., 85-1245
...Supreme Court Grievance Committee in defense of pending allegations of professional misconduct. See People v. Klein, 179 Colo. 408, 500 P.2d 1181 (1972) (en banc) (Klein I ). In granting Klein's petition for reinstatement, the court in Klein II found that Klein had regained his mental healt......
-
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Gresham
...to circumstances presented here. Mosesian v. State Bar of California, 8 Cal.3d 60, 103 Cal.Rptr. 915, 500 P.2d 1115; People v. Klein, 179 Colo. 408, 500 P.2d 1181; In re Lenske, Or., 523 P.2d After considering affidavits presented and fact misconduct which resulted in conviction appears to ......