Legal Opinion
People v. Trupp
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided June 10, 2002No. 01SA391PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hobbs
We hold in this attorney regulation case that: (1) the Presiding Disciplinary Judge has exclusive authority over a C.R.C.P. 11(a) motion, and (2) only the assistant attorney regulation counsel who signed the complaint and amended complaint is answerable to the motion.
After the Presiding Disciplinary Judge suspended Respondent attorney Jerold Trapp’s (“Trupp”) license to practice law due to child support arrearages, the Colorado Supreme Court Attorney Regulation Counsel’s office commenced formal disciplinary proceedings against Trapp, alleging violations of the Colorado Rules of Professional…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Pavelic & LeFlore v. Marvel Entertainment Group, Div. of Cadence Industries Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Leaffer v. ZarlengoSupreme Court of Colorado · 2002
- Board of County Commissioners v. County Road Users Ass'nSupreme Court of Colorado · 2000
- Stepanek v. Delta CountySupreme Court of Colorado · 1997
- Koch v. District Court, Jefferson CountySupreme Court of Colorado · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- In Re BassSupreme Court of Colorado · 2006
- In re FosterSupreme Court of Colorado · 2011
- Adams v. Corrections Corp. of AmericaColorado Court of Appeals · 2011
- In Re TruppSupreme Court of Colorado · 2004
- Chism v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 2003
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.