People v. Patterson, No. 02PDJ021. 5.09.02. Attorney Regulation. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge approved the parties’ Conditional Admission of Misconduct and suspended Respondent, Arthur E. Patterson, from the practice of law for a period of one year and one day for misconduct arising from five separate matters. In the first matter, the client engaged the respondent to prepare and file a petition for dissolution of marriage. Respondent prepared the petition and served it on the opposing party but failed to file it with the court. Believing the petition had been filed, the client tendered payment of costs. Thereafter, despite the client’s attempts to communicate with respondent, respondent failed to respond or otherwise comply promptly with the client’s requests for information, and failed to keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the case. Respondent’s conduct violated Colo. RPC 1.4(a) and Colo. RPC 1.16(d). In a second matter, following a permanent orders hearing, respondent neglected to take action by failing to approve the proposed order, provide his input or send the order to his client, resulting in the client’s incurring additional attorney fees in violation of Colo. RPC 1.3 and Colo. RPC 1.4(a). Following termination, respondent failed to timely return the client’s file when requested in violation of Colo. RPC 1.16(d). In a third matter, respondent received a proposed order resulting from a permanent orders hearing from opposing counsel. Respondent failed to take any action on the order in violation of Colo. RPC 1.3. In a fourth matter, following mediation, opposing counsel tendered a signed settlement agreement to respondent, who thereafter failed to communicate with the client and took no action on behalf of the client with regard to the agreement in violation of Colo. RPC 1.3 and Colo. RPC 1.4(a), causing opposing counsel to seek court enforcement of the settlement agreement. The court granted the motion and ordered respondent to pay for opposing counsel’s attorney fees within a certain time period. Respondent’s failure to do so violated Colo. RPC 3.4(c). In a fifth matter, the client hired respondent to handle post dissolution matters. Respondent failed to file motions with the court in violation of Colo. RPC 1.3. When the husband failed to comply with an agreement, respondent took no action to require his compliance. Thereafter, respondent failed to appear at a hearing in violation of Colo. RPC 1.3 and Colo. RPC 1.4(a). Respondent was ordered to pay restitution and the costs of the disciplinary proceeding.