Colorado

Civil Procedure

Rule 208.1 – Character and Fitness Investigation

(1) Purpose. The purpose of a character and fitness investigation conducted before an individual is admitted to practice law in Colorado is to protect the public and safeguard the system of justice.

(2) Burden of Proof. The applicant shall bear the burden of proving the character and fitness necessary to practice law in Colorado.

(3) Expectations of A Lawyer’s Responsibilities. Applicants should understand that a lawyer’s professional responsibilities include the following minimum expectations set forth in the Preamble to the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct:

(a) A lawyer, as a member of the legal profession, is a representative of clients, an officer of the legal system and a public citizen having special responsibility for the quality of justice;

(b) A lawyer should be competent, prompt and diligent in all professional functions;

(c) A lawyer should maintain communication with a client concerning the representation;

(d) A lawyer should keep in confidence information relating to the representation of a client except when disclosure is required or permitted by the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct or other law;

(e) A lawyer’s conduct should conform to the requirements of the law, both in professional services to clients and in the lawyer’s business and personal affairs;

(f) A lawyer should use the law’s procedures only for legitimate purposes and not to harass or intimidate others;

(g) A lawyer should demonstrate respect for the legal system and for those who serve it, including judges, other lawyers and public officials; and

(h) While it is a lawyer’s duty, when necessary, to challenge the rectitude of official action, it is also the lawyer’s duty to uphold the legal process.

(4) Standard of Character and Fitness. A Colorado lawyer should possess record of conduct that justifies the trust of clients, adversaries, courts and others with respect to the professional responsibilities owed to them. A basis for denial of an application arising from lack of character may exist when the applicant’s record tends to show a deficiency in honesty, integrity, judgment, trustworthiness, diligence, reliability or capacity to practice law. A basis for denial of an application may exist where the applicant’s record reveals a history of deceptiveness, criminality, fraud, negligence, irrational behavior, drug or alcohol dependence or abuse, emotional or mental instability, financial irresponsibility or violence.

(5) Essential Eligibility Requirements. Applicants must meet all of the following essential eligibility requirements for the practice of law:

(a) Honesty and candor with clients, lawyers, courts, regulatory authorities and others;

(b) The ability to reason logically, recall complex factual information, and accurately analyze legal problems;

(c) The ability to use a high degree of organization and clarity in communicating with clients, lawyers, judicial officers, and others;

(d) The ability to use good judgment on behalf of clients and in conducting one’s professional business;

(e) The ability to conduct oneself with respect for and in accordance with the law;

(f) The ability to exhibit regard for the rights and welfare of others;

(g) The ability to comply with the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct; state, local, and federal laws, regulations, statutes, and rules; and orders of a court or tribunal;

(h) The ability to act diligently and reliably in fulfilling obligations to clients, lawyers, courts, and others;

(i) The ability to be honest and use good judgment in financial dealings on behalf of oneself, clients, and others; and

(j) The ability to comply with deadlines and time constraints.

(6) Relevant Conduct. The following shall be treated as cause for scrutiny of whether the applicant possesses the character and fitness necessary to practice law in Colorado:

(a) Unlawful conduct;

(b) Academic misconduct;

(c) Misconduct in employment;

(d) Acts involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation;

(e) Acts that demonstrate disregard for the rights or welfare of others;

(f) Abuse of legal process, including the filing of vexatious or frivolous lawsuits or the raising of vexatious or frivolous defenses;

(g) Neglect of financial responsibilities;

(h) Neglect of professional obligations;

(i) Evidence of a record of recent conduct that demonstrates that the applicant meets the essential eligibility requirements for the practice of law in Colorado and justifies the trust of clients, adversaries, courts and the public;

(j) Evidence that the applicant has changed in ways that will reduce the likelihood of future misconduct; or

(k) Other evidence that supports an assertion of rehabilitation, including medical or psychological testimony or opinion.

(l) Denial of admission to the bar in another jurisdiction on character and fitness grounds; (m) Disciplinary action by a lawyer disciplinary agency or other professional disciplinary agency of any jurisdiction; (n) Making false statements, including material omissions, on law school admission applications; or

(o) Making false statements, including material omissions, on bar applications in this state or any other jurisdiction.

The above is not an exhaustive list, but is instead illustrative of common causes for scrutiny of whether an applicant possesses the character and fitness necessary to practice law in Colorado.

(7)Considerations. The Character and Fitness Committee shall determine whether the applicant possesses the character and fitness necessary to practice law in Colorado. The factors the Committee may consider in assigning weight and significance to the applicant’s prior conduct include, but are not limited to:

(a) The applicant’s age at the time of the conduct;

(b)The recency of the conduct;

(c) The reliability of the information concerning the conduct;

(d) The seriousness of the conduct;

(e) The underlying circumstances of the conduct;

(f)The cumulative effect of the conduct, including its impact on others;

(g)Evidence of rehabilitation documented pursuant to subsection (8);

(h) Any positive social contributions the applicant has made after the conduct occurred;

(i) The applicant’s candor in the admissions process;

(j) The materiality of any omissions or misrepresentations; and

(k) Evidence of mental or emotional instability.

(8)Rehabilitation. An applicant who affirmatively asserts rehabilitation from past conduct may provide evidence of rehabilitation by submitting one or more of the following:

(a) Evidence that the applicant has acknowledged the conduct was wrong and has accepted responsibility for the conduct;

(b) Evidence of strict compliance with the conditions of any disciplinary, judicial, administrative, or other order, where applicable;

(c) Evidence of lack of malice toward those whose duty compelled bringing disciplinary, judicial, administrative, or other proceedings against the applicant;

(d) Evidence of cooperation with the Office of Attorney Admissions investigation;

(e) Evidence that the applicant intends to conform future conduct to the standards of character and fitness necessary to practice law in Colorado;

(f) Evidence of restitution of funds or property, where applicable;

(g)Evidence of positive social contributions through employment, community service, or civic service.

(h) Evidence that the applicant is not currently engaging in misconduct;

(j) Evidence that the applicant has changed in ways that will reduce the likelihood of future misconduct; or

(k) Other evidence that supports an assertion of rehabilitation, including medical or psychological testimony or opinion.

C.R.C.P. 208.1

Source: Entire rule added and effective September 1, 2014.

ANNOTATION Law reviews. For article, “The Colorado Character Investigation of Applicants to the Bar”, see 28 Dicta 333 (1951). Reinstatement after suspension from practice may be conditioned upon undergoing a psychiatric evaluation. People v. Fagan, 745 P.2d 249 (Colo. 1987). Applied in People ex rel. Buckley v. Beck, 199 Colo. 482, 610 P.2d 1069 (1980) (decided under former C.R.C.P. 209 ); People v. Roehl, 655 P.2d 1381 (Colo. 1983) (decided under former rule).

← Previous Next →