Posted by
NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Friday, August 25, 2006 11:38:12 AM
Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure (CRCP) Rule 251.4:
"A judge has a duty to report unprofessional conduct by an attorney to Regulation Counsel pursuant to Canon 3(B)(3) of the Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct. No action taken by any judge pursuant to Canon 3(B)(3) shall in any way limit the power of the reporting judge to exercise the power of contempt against an attorney, nor should the reporting of such matters to the Regulation Counsel be used in lieu of contempt proceedings."
If these words have any meaning, a judge who discovers unethical conduct has no choice but to both start contempt proceedings AND report the issue to Attorney Regulation.
Canon 3(B)(3) of the Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct:
"A judge should take or initiate appropriate disciplinary measures against a judge or lawyer for unprofessional conduct of which the judge may become aware."
Over the past three years, as I have become more and more disgusted with opposing counsel's conduct, I have researched ways to stop it. I have discovered that, while I might prove in a court that the attorney had intentionally attempted to damage me using unethical tactics, I will never be able to take him to court, thanks to the protection ethics rules offer attorneys. I have also discovered that if I were to try to complain to Attorney Regulation, they would tell me that they had no jurisdiction-that only the trial judge has jurisdiction.
It seems that the only way a litigant can seek and get protection from unethical conduct is through the trial judge.
I tried. In May, 2005, I asked, among other things, that the judge in my case "Direct the defense attorney to review the Colorado Code of Professional Conduct and provide the court a written promise not to violate either their spirit or letter again in the matter before the Court."
The trial judge couldn't bring himself to do that, and the misconduct continued.
I would love to tell you that, when I provided the retention commission this information, including my observation that if a trial judge refused to protect a litigant from unethical conduct, the litigant was totally without protection, they felt obligated to inform the public that the judge had a three year record of refusing to protect me.
Nah!!! This judge is "an asset to the community."
--------------------
It may be beginning to sound like I am campaigning against this judge. I am not. I want to expose the way the system works to the public, and the events I am describing are very familiar to me. I know the documentation exists to back it up, most of it in the public record. Courts have ways to bury their mistakes, so finding another example to use to make my points isn't that easy. Both the trial judge and the defense attorney will doubtless be anxious to have this record sealed.