People v. Witt, 80SA290
| Decision Date | 08 September 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 80SA290,80SA290 |
| Citation | 616 P.2d 139,200 Colo. 522 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Complainant, v. Roger D. WITT, Attorney-Respondent. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Linda Donnelly, Disciplinary Prosecutor, Denver, for complainant.
Roger D. Witt, pro se.
The proceedings here are the result of four complaints filed with the Supreme Court Grievance Committee against Respondent, Roger D. Witt, who was admitted to the practice of law in Colorado on April 7, 1966. Based upon the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Grievance Committee, we suspend the Respondent from the practice of law for one year.
The first count in the Grievance Committee's findings concerns the Respondent's agreement to probate an estate. The estate contained sufficient cash to pay the outstanding bills. The Respondent did not open the estate, nor did he return telephone calls or letters from the Personal Representative who was threatened with suit for the deceased's funeral expenses because the bills had not been paid. After ten months of attempting to reach the Respondent, the Personal Representative hired another attorney who paid the bills, the inheritance tax, and closed the estate. The Personal Representative incurred penalties and interest in the amount of $347.43 because of the Respondent's neglect.
The subject of the second count was the Respondent's failure to proceed with a specific performance action filed in April, 1977. The Respondent filed the action on behalf of a buyer of real property against the seller who failed to transfer the property. After the action was filed, the client tried for two years to contact the Respondent. He never obtained a response. The client hired substitute counsel who obtained a judgment for the buyer. The seller, who apparently assumed the law suit had been dropped because nothing had happened for two years, was angered when new counsel revived it. The buyer was the victim of numerous instances of vandalism which he attributes to the seller. There is no direct evidence linking the Respondent to the vandalism, but the Respondent's former client suffered emotional distress.
As described in the third count, the Respondent was hired in December, 1974, to handle a small estate. The Respondent opened the estate, sold the assets, and notified his client that the estate was ready to close upon payment of his attorney's fees. The client paid the fees, but the Respondent never closed the estate. The probate court issued several citations to show cause why the estate had not been closed, and finally issued a contempt citation. When the client received the contempt citation, he hired substitute counsel who attempted to contact the Respondent but received no response. Substitute counsel never received the estate documents, and had to re-do some of the Respondent's work. The estate was finally closed in September, 1979. The Respondent's client incurred...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Austin v. Litvak
......Charnes, 200 Colo. 194, 613 P.2d 884 (1980); People v. Layton, 200 Colo. 59, 612 P.2d 83 (1980). The standard to be applied in considering whether a ......
-
People v. Kendrick
...to expect that one who engages in such egregious professional misconduct shall be disciplined appropriately. See, e.g., People v. Witt, Colo., 616 P.2d 139 (1980); People v. Meldahl, Colo., 615 P.2d 29 (1980); People ex rel. Silverman v. Anderson, Colo., 612 P.2d 94 (1980). See People v. Ra......
-
People v. Braham
...rule violations, neglecting one client's matter and failing to promptly return property or funds to the client); People v. Witt , 200 Colo. 522, 616 P.2d 139, 140 (1980) (attorney suspended for one year for pattern of neglect and delay of legal matters and a total disregard for the necessit......
-
People v. Blanck
...to provide accurate information to the client regarding the status of a legal matter entrusted to him or her. People v. Witt, 200 Colo. 522, 616 P.2d 139 (1980); Martin v. State Bar, 20 Cal.3d 717, 144 Cal.Rptr. 214, 575 P.2d 757 (1978); In re Brown, 88 N.J. 443, We find unpersuasive the re......
-
Macros, Monsters and Malpractice
..."interpersonal relationship," rather than unethical conduct.). See also, People v. Southern, 638 P.2d 787 (Colo. 1982); People v. Witt, 616 P.2d 139 (Colo. 1980); People v. Bugg, 616 P.2d 133 (Colo. 1980); People v. McMichael, 609 P.2d 633 (Colo. 1980). 3. An attorney must be careful in the......