People v. Steven Richard Louth. 22PDJ006. February 1, 2022.
The Presiding Disciplinary Judge approved the parties’ stipulation to discipline and publicly censured Steven Richard Louth (attorney registration number 17968). The public censure took effect February 1, 2022.
Per an order entered in Louth’s domestic case in January 2014, Louth was to pay $1,400.00 in monthly child support. In March 2020, Louth moved to modify child support and parenting time.
In July 2020, Louth’s ex-wife moved to compel Louth’s financial disclosures, requesting attorney’s fees and sanctions. The court granted the motion and ordered the parties to file sworn financial statements and other materials within two weeks. Around that time, Louth’s ex-wife also sought issuance of a contempt citation for unpaid child support, asserting that Louth had stopped paying child support in April 2020 and owed her $8,400.00 in support arrearages. The court set a combined hearing for April 2021 on the contempt citation and on Louth’s motion to modify. It also ordered the parties to provide disclosures at least seven days before the hearing and directed Louth to file his financial materials at his earliest opportunity.
In January 2021, Louth’s ex-wife moved to compel disclosures and discovery, noting that Louth had failed to comply with the court’s earlier orders concerning disclosures. At the April 2021 hearing, as Louth was set to present his case, his ex-wife objected to addressing child support issues based on his repeated failure to file financial disclosures. She also moved for sanctions. The court granted her motion for sanctions, dismissed Louth’s motion to modify, opined that Louth had “stonewalled” the issue of his finances, and found Louth in remedial contempt for his failure to pay child support between April 2020 and April 2021. A few months later Louth paid the full arrearage amount to his ex-wife.
Through this conduct, Louth violated Colo. RPC 3.4(a) (a lawyer shall not unlawfully obstruct another party's access to evidence); Colo. RPC 3.4(d) (a lawyer shall not, in pretrial procedure, fail to make a reasonably diligent effort to comply with a legally proper discovery request by opposing party); and Colo. RPC 8.4(d) (providing that it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice).
The case file is public per C.R.C.P. 242.41(a)(2).