People v. SCHOEDEL

35 P.3d 750, 2001 Colo. Discipl. LEXIS 108, 2001 WL 1468877
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado
DecidedNovember 7, 2001
Docket01PDJ058
StatusPublished

This text of 35 P.3d 750 (People v. SCHOEDEL) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. SCHOEDEL, 35 P.3d 750, 2001 Colo. Discipl. LEXIS 108, 2001 WL 1468877 (Colo. 2001).

Opinion

OPINION AND ORDER REINSTATING ARMINTA S. SCHOEDEL TO THE PRACTICE OF LAW

ATTORNEY REINSTATED

This reinstatement matter was heard on September 7, 2001, pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.29(b) and (c) before the Presiding Disciplinary Judge ("PDJ") and two hearing board members, Terry Rogers and J.D. Snodgrass, both members of the Bar. James C. Coyle, Assistant Attorney Regulation Counsel represented respondent, the People of the State of Colorado (the "People"). Michael V. Makaroff appeared on behalf of petitioner, Arminta Sue Schoedel ("Schoedel") who was also present. The PDJ and Hearing Board heard testimony from Kermit Al-lard, Carolyn Pannell, Naney English and John Mackey, all of whom testified as witnesses for Schoedel. Arminta Sue Schoedel testified on her own behalf. Petitioner's Exhibits 1 through 21 were admitted into evidence by stipulation.

The PDJ and Hearing Board considered the testimony and exhibits admitted, assessed the credibility of the witnesses, and made the following findings of fact which were established by clear and convincing evidence.

*751 I. FINDINGS OF FACT

Arminta Sue Schoedel, attorney registration number 26248, was licensed to practice law in the State of Colorado on October 28, 1995. She is subject to the jurisdiction of this court pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.1(b).

On October 18, 1999, pursuant to a Conditional Admission of Misconduct (the "Stipulation") entered into by the parties and approved by the Presiding Disciplinary Judge, Arminta Sue Schoedel was suspended from the practice of law for a period of thirty (80) days, effective November 18, 1999. See People v. Schoedel, Case No. 99PDJ099 (Colo. PDJ October 18, 1999), 28 Colo. Law. 191-192 (December 1999), 1999 Colo. Discipl. LEXIS 42. As a condition of reinstatement, the Supreme Court required that Schoedel petition for reinstatement pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.29(c) and timely pay the costs of that proceeding.

Schoedel's suspension arose from the stipulated facts set forth in the Stipulation in which Schoedel admitted to violations of the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct in four separate matters. Schoedel failed to pay a bill or otherwise communicate with the party to whom she owed money in one matter. In two other matters, Schoedel failed to timely submit a client accounting and failed to keep the clients informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information. In the fourth matter, Schoedel failed to timely refund a client retainer and failed to keep the client informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information.

The People stipulated that Schoedel had substantially complied with all court orders relating to her suspension and further stated that the People did not oppose reinstatement. However, counsel for the People requested that Schoedel's reinstatement be conditioned by the imposition of periodic accounting reviews, peer monitoring and a requirement that Schoedel not engage in the solo practice of law, all for a defined period of time.

Prior to commencing a solo family law practice upon her admission to the bar in October, 1995, Schoedel was a full time registered nurse for fifteen years. While continuing to practice full time as a nurse, Schoedel commenced law school in 1990 and completed her law degree in 1995. In her last semester of law school, Schoedel's father, with whom she had a close relationship, became ill and was hospitalized. The manner in which her father was treated while hospitalized, the hospital personnel's refusal to allow Schoedel and other family members to be with their father during his final hours and her father's death under such cireumstances resulted in significant mental and emotional trauma for Schoedel. She was able to put aside the grieving process and to deal with the mental and emotional problems associated with her father's death in such fashion that she was able to complete her law studies and commence her law practice. After she commenced practicing law, Schoedel continued to practice nursing on a part-time basis to provide additional income while she built up her law practice.

Soon after she commenced practicing law, Schoedel started treatment for depression and post-traumatic stress disorder. The delayed grieving process together with the mental and emotional problems that led to treatment caused Schoedel to leave her law practice in December, 1997. No grievances were filed against Schoedel prior to that time.

Schoedel continues to take anti-depressants but is not currently involved in therapy. David S. Wahl, M.D. concluded that Schoedel "is not impaired or disabled as a result of a psychiatric condition." Dr. Wahl also opined that Schoedel's "intense and disabling grief seems to have been adequately resolved."

In 1998, Schoedel resumed her nursing career on a full time basis, first in Denver at the Visiting Nurse Association and since June 3, 2000 as a branch manager at Icon Home Health in Ft. Collins. In both positions, Schoedel has supervised a number of other health professionals. In these positions, Schoedel has been a competent manager, has communicated well, has made appropriate decisions and has been an effective leader. Caroline Pannell, an attorney prac *752 ticing in Fort Collins, has known and worked with Schoedel since 1995. Schoedel assisted Ms. Pannell with research and other paralegal activities beginning in 2000. Ms. Pannell practices in an office in Fort Collins with four other attorneys in an office-sharing arrangement. All the attorneys in the office have utilized Schoedel's research and paralegal services. Ms. Pannell describes Schoedel as very dependable, diligent, committed, trustworthy, mentally stable and a thorough researcher. At Schoedel's request, Ms. Pan-nell has agreed to act as a monitor for Schoe-del and understands the requirements imposed on a practice monitor. Kermit Allard, a Certified Public Accountant licensed in Colorado for twenty-eight years, has agreed to provide tax, accounting and financial consulting services to Schoedel upon resumption of her law practice. Mr. Allard is familiar with the requirements imposed upon lawyers with respect to trust accounts and financial record keeping. He has committed to assist Schoe-del with a law practice accounting system that will address receipts, disbursements and trust accounting consistent with the requirements imposed upon practicing attorneys by the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct and Colorado statutes. All witnesses that were asked or provided such opinions were fully supportive of Schoedel's return to the practice of law and gave their unqualified recommendation that Schoedel be reinstated.

Schoedel has maintained her competence in the practice of law as evidenced by the services she has performed for practicing attorneys and the continuing legal education courses she has completed. The courses taken by Schoedel include emphasis on ethics, solo practice management and family law, the area of law to which Schoedel intends to return. The ethics courses attended by Schoedel reviewed issues relating to communications with clients and matters relating to the handling of client funds and trust accounts. The courses which Schoedel completed focused upon those deficiencies which led to her suspension. Schoedel now understands the necessity to return client funds promptly upon request and the necessity to timely respond to client inquiries.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Klein
756 P.2d 1013 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1988)
Goff v. People
35 P.3d 487 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 P.3d 750, 2001 Colo. Discipl. LEXIS 108, 2001 WL 1468877, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-schoedel-colo-2001.