People v. Harper
294 P.3d 161
Colo.2012Background
- Respondent was admitted to Florida bar in 1985 and suspension matters arose from Florida discipline.
- Florida bar charged Respondent over misconduct in USAA-related litigation (2005) and related disciplinary proceedings.
- People filed Colorado reciprocal-discipline complaint on February 17, 2012.
- Hearing on Florida discipline occurred September 28–30, 2010; Judge Pegg issued a report October 26, 2010.
- Florida Supreme Court suspended Respondent for 91 days in August 2011; reinstatement condition followed; Florida proceedings later affirmed on appeal.
- Colorado proceedings rely on C.R.C.P. 251.21(d) to impose reciprocal discipline unless due-process concerns exist.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Respondent's Rule 56(h) motion merits summary judgment. | People argues no summary judgment; facts disputed. | Harper contends undisputed facts entitle judgment. | Denied; factual disputes and improper use of 56(h). |
| Whether Florida due process issues invalidated reciprocal discipline. | People contends Florida process valid; misconduct established. | Harper asserts Florida proceedings violated due process. | Due process not violated; Florida discipline upheld. |
| Whether Florida adjudication conclusively establishes misconduct for Colorado reciprocal discipline. | People satisfied burden; Florida outcome proves misconduct. | Harper argues limitations under 251.21(d) require scrutiny. | Final Florida adjudication conclusive; Colorado imposes same discipline. |
| Whether Respondent's other due process challenges in Florida affect Colorado action. | Not disputed; protections satisfied. | Respondent raises various notice and confrontation concerns. | Challenges fail; due process satisfied. |
| What remedy should Colorado impose given Florida's discipline? | Impose Florida discipline (91 days suspension) and reinstatement conditions. | Challenge to severity or process; seek different sanction. | Impose 91-day suspension with reinstatement requirements. |
Key Cases Cited
- Calder v. Cal., 897 P.2d 831, 897 P.2d 831 (Colo. 1995) (due process in reciprocal discipline; burden on respondent shown by clear and convincing evidence)
- People v. Williams, 892 P.2d 885, 892 P.2d 885 (Colo. 1995) (notice, opportunity to defend, appeal; no due process violation in disciplinary context)
- In re Smith, 989 P.2d 165, 989 P.2d 165 (Colo. 1999) (reciprocal discipline; review of foreign proceedings consistent with due process standards)