Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

People v. Daniel

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided March 17, 2008No. Nos. 07PDJ026, 07PDJ047PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*410REPORT, DECISION, AND ORDER IMPOSING SANCTIONS PURSUANT TO C.R.C.P. 251.19(c)

I. ISSUE

Disbarment is the presumptive sanction when a lawyer knowingly converts client or third-party funds and causes serious or potentially serious injury. Respondent knowingly converted sizeable amounts of third-party funds while serving as a qualified intermediary in § 1081 tax-deferred real estate exchanges. He later disappeared and failed to participate in these proceedings. Is disbarment the appropriate sanction in this case?

SANCTION IMPOSED: ATTORNEY DISBARRED

II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. In Re RooseSupreme Court of Colorado · 2003
  2. People v. RichardsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
  3. People v. MotsenbockerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1996
  4. Stewart v. LuceroNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1996
  5. People v. McDowellSupreme Court of Colorado · 1997

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, In the Interest of D.P., Child, and Concerning M.S.Colorado Court of Appeals · 2008
  2. The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, In the Interest of D.P., Child, and Concerning M.S.Colorado Court of Appeals · 2008

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API