People v. Anthony Henry Veto. 21PDJ038. June 23, 2021. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge approved the parties’ conditional admission of misconduct and publicly censured Anthony Henry Veto (attorney registration number 00459), effective June 23, 2021.
Veto operates a solo practice. For the past four years, he has employed a paralegal who graduated from an online law school that is not accredited by the American Bar Association. The paralegal handles a variety of matters in Veto’s office. Veto believed that the paralegal was authorized to practice law under Colorado’s Student Practice Act.
In a domestic relations case, Veto and the paralegal appeared at a hearing. When Veto attempted to offer letters into evidence and the judge questioned the letters’ admissibility, Veto had the paralegal explain to the court why the letters were not hearsay. The paralegal identified himself as a Texas student attorney and argued that he was permitted under Colorado’s Student Practice Act to argue before the court. In fact, the paralegal was not authorized to represent anyone under the Act or any other body of Colorado law. In another hearing, Veto and the paralegal appeared, and the paralegal made a number of legal arguments.
Later, after entering an appearance, opposing counsel filed a notice, arguing that the paralegal was practicing law without a license. Veto responded in writing, arguing that the paralegal was under his supervision, was a registered student attorney in Texas and New Mexico, and was in good standing in both jurisdictions. The underlying matter concluded before the judge addressed the unauthorized practice of law issue.
Through this conduct, Veto violated Colo. RPC 5.3(a) (a partner or lawyer with comparable managerial authority shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that a firm implements measures to reasonably assure that nonlawyer employees’ conduct is compatible with the lawyer’s professional obligations) and Colo. RPC 5.5(a)(3) (a lawyer shall not assist a person who is not authorized to practice law to perform any activity that constitutes the unauthorized practice of law).
The case file is public per C.R.C.P. 251.31.