Court Opinions: Presiding Disciplinary Judge Opinions for May 29

Editor’s Note: Law Week Colorado edits court opinion summaries for style and, when necessary, length.

People v. Samuel W. Cantrell


On July 31, 2023, Samuel Cantrell pleaded guilty in Utah to two counts of forcible sexual abuse on an individual, a second-degree felony. 

The Presiding Disciplinary Judge approved Cantrell’s stipulation to discipline and disbarred him, effective May 29.

People v. Brian S. Mackenzie

In one client matter, Brian Mackenzie filed a personal injury claim in November 2020 on behalf of a client, whom Mackenzie also represented in two other personal injury matters. Mackenzie failed to exercise diligence, the disciplinary opinion noted. He didn’t file expert disclosures, conduct discovery, exchange or file exhibit and witness lists, submit jury instructions or prepare a draft trial management order. Mackenzie also failed to respond to motions based on these deficiencies, including a motion to exclude expert testimony — which the presiding court granted — and a motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute. Mackenzie didn’t inform his client about these developments.

One week before the trial’s start date, Mackenzie unsuccessfully moved to continue the matter. He did not inform his client that the trial wasn’t continued. Four days before the start of the trial, Mackenzie and his client failed to appear for the client’s deposition. Mackenzie didn’t inform his client about the deposition date or that they were required to appear. That same day, the opposing party again moved to dismiss. Attached was a voicemail transcription in which Mackenzie told opposing counsel that he wouldn’t appear at the deposition and invited opposing counsel to move to dismiss the case. 

On the first day of the trial, neither Mackenzie nor his client appeared, and the court dismissed the matter with prejudice. The court entered judgment against Mackenzie’s client on all claims 10 days later. Mackenzie took no action, and he didn’t inform his client that her case was dismissed and that judgment had been entered against her until October 2022. Nor did he return his client’s file until December 2022, despite her earlier efforts to obtain the file. He also failed to communicate with the client about how settlement proceeds were handled and took no action as to some of those funds, according to the disciplinary opinion.

In another matter, Mackenzie failed to respond to a motion to dismiss based on his failure to provide proper notice of his client’s personal injury claim under the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, resulting in dismissal of the claim. Mackenzie didn’t inform his client about the motion until 16 days after it was filed, and he didn’t respond to her attempts to communicate about the matter.

In a third matter, Mackenzie entered his appearance in a client’s workers’ compensation case in October 2020. After May 2022, Mackenzie and his staff stopped responding to the client’s attempts to communicate, and Mackenzie didn’t complete work on his client’s claim and didn’t withdraw from the matter.

The Presiding Disciplinary Judge approved Mackenzie’s stipulation to discipline and disbarred him, effective May 29.

Previous articleLegal Lowdown: Sherman & Howard Announces Summer Associates, Polsinelli Adds One
Next articleColorado’s 2024 Legislative Session: Collaboration and Compromise Are Back

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here