Opinions

Decision Information

Decision Content

People v. Christian Lee Johnson. 14PDJ023. March 17, 2014. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge approved the parties’ conditional admission of misconduct and suspended Christian Lee Johnson (Attorney Registration Number 41286) for thirty days, all stayed upon the completion of a two-year period of probation with conditions. The probation took effect March 17, 2014.

Johnson began practicing with a partner in 2011, but his partner dissolved the partnership in 2012 after discovering that Johnson had been making unauthorized charges to the firm’s credit card, which was tied to the firm’s operating account. Nevertheless, Johnson still held himself out as practicing under the partnership. In mid-2012, Johnson was retained in a dissolution and custody matter. He failed to file certain documents in the case, yet billed the client for working on the documents. Later that year, he informed his client that a family emergency would keep him out of state for a couple of months. Johnson volunteered to see if his “partner” would take over the case, not explaining that the partnership had been dissolved, and then he simply left the client’s file at his former partner’s office without securing that attorney’s agreement to represent the client. As a result, no work was performed on the client’s behalf for about two months. Johnson then delayed in complying with the client’s request that he provide an accounting and withdraw from the case.

Through his misconduct, Johnson violated Colo. RPC 1.3 (diligence), 1.4(a)(3) (a lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter), 1.4(a)(4) (a lawyer shall promptly comply with reasonable requests for information), 1.15(c) (a lawyer shall keep disputed property separate until an accounting is performed), 1.16(a)(3) (a lawyer shall withdraw if the lawyer is discharged), 7.5(d) (a lawyer may state that he or she practices in a partnership only when that is the fact), and 8.4(c) (dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation).

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.