Editor’s Note: Law Week Colorado edits court opinion summaries for style and, when necessary, length.
Following a reinstatement hearing, a hearing board reinstated Laura Mathews to the practice of law in Colorado, effective April 9.
In September 2020, Mathews was suspended from the practice of law for three years. The suspension was premised on three episodes of misconduct, according to the disciplinary opinion. First, Mathews failed to initiate a guardianship proceeding on behalf of two clients and failed to communicate with them about the status of their case. Next, Mathews was convicted in 2019 for forging her clients’ names on a fee agreement, a class 5 misdemeanor. Last, Mathews pleaded guilty in 2019 for driving under the influence and for reckless driving.
The hearing board reinstated Mathews, finding she proved by clear and convincing evidence that she complied with all disciplinary rules and orders.
In August 2021, a client retained Armin Sharifi to represent her in a domestic relations case. But the engagement agreement didn’t memorialize that matter in the scope of representation; it lists only related legal work. The agreement specified the client would receive a monthly invoice summarizing work performed and fees charged against the client’s $12,500 retainer, which Sharifi placed in his firm’s trust account.
Sharifi never entered an appearance in his client’s domestic relations case, and the client hired other lawyers to assist her in that matter. But she didn’t terminate Sharifi, who performed other work for her. As he did so, he moved earned portions of the retainer into his operating account. But he didn’t send the client an invoice or inform her that her funds were being applied toward his fees, according to the disciplinary opinion.
An unissued invoice Sharifi produced to disciplinary authorities in June 2023 showed he last did work for the client in November 2021. Even so, in January 2022, Sharifi moved what he believed was the unearned balance of the client’s funds from his trust account to his operating account.
On Feb. 3, 2022, the client’s assistant requested an accounting. The next day, Sharifi issued from his operating account a check to his accountant for $2,900. The check was made out to the accountant’s business with a memo line that read, “Pay check.” Sharifi’s accountant didn’t refund the client $2,900.
Soon after, Sharifi stopped communicating with his accountant. On Feb. 21, 2022, the client reiterated her request for an accounting. Sharifi replied, vowing to speak with his accountant, but he didn’t produce an accounting, according to the opinion. On four more occasions in March and April 2022, the client emailed Sharifi, terminating his services and requesting billing statements and a refund.
On April 30, 2022, Sharifi emailed the client. He told her he had issued an invoice and reimbursement check and sent both by courier the day before. This was not true, according to the opinion. The client didn’t receive a refund check or invoice until Oct. 18, 2023. The client disputes the amount Sharifi earned based on the invoice he submitted to disciplinary authorities, but Sharifi is unable to produce a general ledger or individual client ledger reflecting his handling of the client’s funds.
The Presiding Disciplinary Judge approved Sharifi’s stipulation to discipline and suspended him for one year and one day, with six months to be served and six months and one day to be stayed on the successful completion of a two-year conditional probation, effective April 11.