People v. Calvert, 280 P.3d 1269

Background

Respondent, a Colorado attorney admitted in 1962 (attorney registration 01828), engaged in multiple acts harming clients Weinhauer and Mayberry, including recording a false deed of trust to secure his loan interests and pressuring for assignment to his firm Calvert & Company.
Respondent loaned Mayberry about $150,000 across 2009–2010 without writing, informed consent, or independent counsel; used Mayberry’s house as security via a deed of trust signed only by Mayberry.
Respondent misled Weinhauer by promising to pay medical bills and then stopping payment on two checks, while failing to notify the Weinhauers about the unpaid bills.
Respondent represented both Mayberry and the Weinhauers in related transactions and later sought to obtain the Weinhauers’ assignment of the deed of trust to Calvert & Company, creating a concurrent conflict of interest.
Respondent allowed non-lawyer Parrish to conduct bankruptcy filings using Respondent’s ECM login/password, with Respondent failing to supervise, review, or correct Parrish’s improper filings and communications.
Respondent’s conduct in the Sonmez bankruptcy matters and dog-bite case involved unauthorized practice of law by Parrish, supervision failures, and beneficiary harm to clients, leading to disciplinary action.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Respondent violated the ethics rules in the Weinhauer/Mayberry matters	People contend Respondent recorded a false deed to secure his own interest and pursued a conflicting transaction.	Calvert argues no intentional misconduct; actions were in clients’ interests or inadvertent	Yes; violations established (disbarment considered).
Whether Respondent violated RPC 1.7(a) by representing adverse interests	Respondent represented Mayberry and Weinhauers with adverse interests during the deed transaction.	Respondent claims no ongoing representation of both parties or no conflict.	Yes; concurrent conflict shown and favored disbarment.
Whether Respondent violated RPC 8.4(c) by dishonest conduct	Recording the deed of trust was fraudulent and misrepresented payment of bills.	Recordation was in good faith per Kantor’s instructions; misstatements denied.	Yes; fraud evidenced; violated 8.4(a) and (c).
Whether Respondent violated RPC 5.5/5.8 by supervising non-lawyer Parrish	Respondent improperly allowed Parrish to practice law and file bankruptcy using his credentials.	Respondent asserts minimal responsibility; Parrish acted independently.	Yes; supervision violated 5.5 and 5.3, constituting misconduct.
Whether Respondent’s conduct in the Sonmez matters warranted discipline and the appropriate sanction	Respondent knowingly facilitated unauthorized practice and failed to supervise, injuring clients.	Mitigating factors exist; remorse and rehabilitation arguments raised.	Disbarment warranted under ABA Standards; pattern of misconduct and aggravating factors.

Key Cases Cited

People v. Rudman, 948 P.2d 1022 (Colo. 1997) (disbarment/sanctions for dishonesty and deceit in handling client assets (context))
People v. Vigil, 770 P.2d 402 (Colo. 1989) (disbarment in cases involving multiple aggravating factors and deceit)
People v. Stewart, 892 P.2d 875 (Colo. 1995) (suspension for unauthorized practice and neglect; distinguishing mitigating factors)
In re Easier, 275 S.C. 269, 269 S.E.2d 765 (S.C. 1980) (fraudulent sale/transfer involving attorney; disbarment considerations)
Coppola v. Maryland, 19 A.3d 431 (Md. 2011) (disbarment for forging signatures on estate documents in distress context)
In re Felker, (Colo. Supreme Court authority cited) (Colo. (contextual)) (disbarment/serious misconduct framework (ABA standards reference))
People v. Reynolds, 933 P.2d 1295 (Colo. 1997) (unauthorized practice of law by non-lawyer assistance; supervision concerns)
In re Easier, 275 S.C. 269, 269 S.E.2d 765 (S.C. 1980) (illustrative for non-lawyer involvement and disbarment)