Colorado Supreme Court
2 East 14th Avenue
Denver, CO 80203
Original Proceeding in Unauthorized Practice of Law
15UPL022
Petitioner:
The People of the State of Colorado,
v.
Respondent:
Donna Cole, d/b/a Park Paralegal.
Supreme Court Case No:
2015SA267
ORDER OF INJUNCTION
Upon consideration of the Stipulation, Agreement and Affidavit Consenting to an Order
of Injunction filed in the above cause, and now being sufficiently advised in the premises,
IT IS ORDERED that DONNA COLE, d/b/a PARK PARALEGAL shall be, and the
same hereby is, ENJOINED from engaging in the unauthorized practice of law.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that DONNA COLE pay restitution plus interest as
outlined in Exhibit B to Stipulation in 15SA267.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Respondent is assessed costs in the amount of
$91.00. Said costs to be paid to the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel, within (30) days
from the date of this order.
BY THE COURT, NOVEMBER 30, 2015.
DATE FILED: November 30, 2015
CASE NUMBER: 2015SA267
SUPREME
COURT,
STATE
Of
COLORADO
2E.
l4thAve
Denver,
Colorado
$0203
ORIGINAL
PROCEEDING
IN
UNAUTHORIZED
PRACTICE
OF
LAW,
15UPL022
Petitioner:
THE
PEOPLE
Of
THE
STATE
Of
COLORADO
A
COURT
USE
ONLY
A
Respondent:
Case
Number:
20158A267
DONNA
COLE,
d/b/a
PARK
PARALEGAL
Kim
E.
Ikeler,
#15590
Assistant
Regulation
Counsel
Attorney
for
Petitioner
1300
Broadway,
Suite
500
Denver,
Colorado
80203
Telephone: (303)
457-5800x7$63
fax
No.:
(303)
501-1
141
E-mail:
Brian
B.
Boal,
#38698
Boal
Law
firm,
P.C.
Attorney
for
Respondent
405
S.
Cascade
Ave.,
Ste.
301
Colorado
Springs,
CO $0903
Telephone:
(719)
203-6339
E-mail:
STIPULATION,
AGREEMENT
AND
AFFIDAVIT CONSENTING
To
AN
ORDER
OF
INJUNCTION
On
this
—
“
day
of
November
2015,
Kim
E.
Ikeler,
Assistant
Regulation
Counsel,
and
Donna
Cole,
who
does
business
as
Park
Paralegal,
the Respondent,
1
DATE FILED: November 23, 2015 9:35 AM
FILING ID: 66C77E0DA2590
CASE NUMBER: 2015SA267
who
is
represented
in
this
matter
by
Brian
B.
Boal,
Esq.,
enter
into
the
following
stipulation,
agreement,
and
affidavit
consenting
to
an
order
of
injunction
(“stipulation”)
and
submit
the
same
to
the
Colorado
Supreme
Court for
a
finding
and
order
of
injunction
pursuant
to
C.R.C.P.
229-237.
1.
Respondent
Cole’s
business
addresses
are
1745
B
St.,
Colorado
Springs,
Colorado
80906
and
60$
S.
Nevada
Ave.,
Colorado
Springs,
Colorado
$0903.
Respondent
Cole
is
not
licensed
to
practice
law
in
the
State
of
Colorado
or
any
state.
2.
Respondent
enters
into
this
stipulation
freely
and
voluntarily.
No
promises
have
been
made
concerning
future
consideration,
punishment,
or
lenience
in
the
above-referenced
matter.
It
is
Respondent’s
personal decision,
and
Respondent
affirms
there
has
been
no
coercion
or
other
intimidating
acts
by
any
person
or agency
concerning
this matter.
3.
Respondent
is
familiar
with
the rules
of
the
Colorado Supreme
Court
regarding
the
unauthorized
practice
of
law.
Respondent acknowledges
the
right
to
a
full
and
complete
evidentiaiy
hearing
on
the
above-referenced
petition
for
injunction.
At
any
such
hearing,
Respondent
would
have
the
right
to
be
represented
by
counsel,
present
evidence,
call
witnesses,
and
cross-examine
the
witnesses
presented
by
the
Petitioner.
At any
such
formal
hearing,
the
Petitioner
would
have the
burden
of
proof
and
would
be
required
to
prove
the
charges
2
contained
in
the
petition
for
injunction
by
a
preponderance
of
the
evidence.
Nonetheless
having
full
knowledge
of
the
right
to
such
a
formal
hearing,
the
Respondent
waives
that
right.
4.
Respondent
understands
that
the
practice
of
law
in
Colorado
includes, but
is
not
limited
to,
the
following:
a.
providing
advice
to
any
other
individual
on
the
legal
effect
of
any
proposed
action
in a
legal
matter;
or
assisting
that
individual
in
making decisions
that
require
legal
judgment
and
a
knowledge
of
the
law
that
is
greater
than
the
average
citizen;
b.
providing
advice
to
any
other
individual
as
to
various
legal
remedies
available
to
that
individual
and
the
possible
legal
courses
of
action
for
that
individual;
c.
acting
in
a
representative
capacity
on
behalf
of
any
other
individual
in
matters
that
affect
that
individual’s
legal
rights
and
duties;
U.
selecting
or
preparing
any
legal
document
for
any
other
individual,
other
than
solely
as
a
typist;
and,
without
limiting
the
above,
explaining
to
that
individual
or
any
other
individual
the
legal
significance
of
such
document;
e.
holding
oneself
out
as
an
attorney,
lawyer,
“esquire”,
immigration
consultant, or
legal
consultant, either
directly
or
impliedly;
f.
holding
oneself
out
to
others
in
a
manner
that another
individual
would
place
some
reliance
on the
Respondent
to
handle
that
individual’s
legal
matters;
g.
advertising
oneself
as
an
immigration
consultant,
or
being
able
to
select
and
prepare immigration
paperwork
on
behalf
of
others
(without
U.S.BIA.
accreditation);
3
h.
making
an
appearance
or
speaking
on
behalf
of
another
individual
in
negotiations,
settlement
conferences,
mediations,
hearings,
trials,
oral
arguments
or
other
legal
proceedings
unless
specifically
allowed
by
the rules
that
apply
to
such
appearance
in
such
legal
proceeding;
i.
serving
as
a
conduit
or
intermediary
on
behalf
of
any
other
individual
for
the
obtaining
or
relaying
of
any
legal
counsel;
j.
conducting
the
business
of
management
of
a
law
practice
to the
extent
that
the
exercise
of
legal
judgment
on
behalf
of
another
occurs;
and
k.
soliciting
or
accepting
any
fees for
legal
services.
5.
Respondent
and
the
Petitioner
stipulate
to
the
following
facts
and
conclusions:
a.
Respondent
engaged
in
the
unauthorized
practice
of
law
by
advertising
on
Craigslist,
offering
assistance
with
a
variety
of
domestic
relations
matters.
The
advertisement
gave
the
reader
the
impression
that
Respondent
was
authorized
to
select
and
prepare
the
forms for
these
matters.
b.
Respondent
also
engaged
in
the
unauthorized
practice
of
law
by
providing
a
link
on
her
website
to
a
questionnaire,
which
the
customer
could
complete.
Respondent
or
her
employees
would
then
select
and
prepare
domestic
relations
forms
using
it.
c.
Respondent
further
engaged
in
the
unauthorized
practice
of
law,
as
follows.
4
d.
Respondent’s
employee
“Lucy” advised
Hillaiy
and
Bret
foster
to
seek
a
change
of
venue
of
the
California
divorce
case
to
the
El
Paso
County
Court,
as
a
means
of
pursuing
a
reunification
with
Bret
Foster’s
children.
e.
Respondent
selected
and prepared
the
Petition
to
Register
for
Bret
Foster’s
signature,
which
Respondent then
filed
to
commence
the
Colorado parental
responsibilities
case.
f.
Respondent
supplied
Hillary
Foster
with
a
questionnaire,
for
the
purpose
of
generating
pleadings
for
allocation
of
parental
responsibilities.
g.
Respondent
advised
Trinity Parker
that
her
debt
to
Colorado
Christian
University was
not
valid.
h.
Respondent
selected
and
prepared
forms
for
Ms.
Parker’s
divorce.
i.
Respondent’s
employee,
“Lucy”,
advised
Gloria
Ferguson
regarding
child
support
and
the
division
of
marital
property.
j.
Respondent
and
her employee
selected
and
prepared
pleadings
to
be
filed
in
Ms.
Ferguson’s
divorce
case.
k.
Respondent
or
her
employees
selected
and
prepared
divorce
pleadings
for
Kristin
Baker,
Nathan Hatpern,
Jennifer
Silvas,
Kelly
Matthews,
Bernadette
F
ailla,
Andrew
Schaefer,
and
Demetrius
Gaines.
5
6.
Respondent
has
read
and
studied
the
Petition
for
Injunction
and
is
familiar
with
the
allegations
therein,
and
a
true
and
correct
copy
of
the
Petition
for
Injunction
is
attached
to
this
stipulation
as
Exhibit
A.
7.
Pursuant
to
C.R.C.P.
237(a),
Respondent
agrees
to
pay
the
administrative
costs
in
the
sum
of
$91
incurred
in
conjunction
with
this
matter
within
30
days
after
the
acceptance
of
the
stipulation
by
the
Colorado Supreme
Court.
8.
Respondent further
agrees
to
refund
the
amounts
paid
to
her,
listed
on
the
attached
Exhibit
B,
plus
interest
at
8%
per
annum,
compounded
annually,
to
each
of
the
listed
customers
upon
approval
of
this
Stipulation
by
the
Court.
Interest
will
be
computed
at 8%
per
annum
from
the
date
paid
and
continuing
on
the
unpaid
balance
through
the
date each
refund
is
paid
in
full.
9.
Respondent
further
agrees
to
remove
from the
Park
Paralegal
website,
www.parkparalegal.org,
any
content
that
would
give
the
public
the impression
that
she or Park
Paralegal
are
authorized
to
practice
law,
including
the
law
of
domestic
relations.
Respondent
further
agrees
to
remove
from
the
Park
Paralegal
website
any
link
to
a
workbook
or
questionnaire,
from
which domestic
relations
legal
forms
can
be
selected
and
prepared.
10.
Based
on
Respondents’
cooperation
in
entering
into
this
Stipulation,
the
parties
ask
that
the
Court
exempt
Respondent
from
a
fine.
6
Donna
o
e,
Respondent
1745
B
Street
Colorado
Springs,
CO
80906
)
)
ss.
to
before
me
this
C
day
of
November
2015,
by
Witness
my
hand
and
official
seal.
My
commission
AJLo
Notary Public
Brian
B.
Boal,
#38698
Boal
Law
Firm,
P.C.
Attorney
for
Respondent
RECOMMENDATION
FOR
AND
CONSENT
TO
ORDER
OF
INJUNCTION
Based
on
the
foregoing,
the
parties
hereto
recommend
that
an
order
be
entered
enjoining
Respondent
from
the
unauthorized
practice
of
law,
and
requiring
that
Respondent
pay
restitution
to
each
of
Respondent’s
customers
listed
in
Exhibit
B,
In
the
amounts
listed
on
Exhibit
B,
plus interest
as
described
above,
and
pay
costs
in
the
amount
of
$91.
Donna
Cole,
the
Respondent;
Brian
B.
Boal,
Esq.,
her
counsel,
and
Kim
E.
Ikeler,
attorney
for
Petitioner,
acknowledge
by
signing
this document
that
they
have
read
and
reviewed
the
above.
)
L
NUALAPOULOS
NOTARY
PUBLIC
STATE
OF
COLORADO
NOTARY
tD
620104011306
MY
COMMISSION
EXPIRES
APRIL
14.
2016
STATE
OF
COLORADO
COUNTY
OF
EL
PASO
Subscribed
and sworn
Donna
Cole,
known
to
me.
expires:
HI
IL
20
1559
Assistant
Regulation
Counsel
Attorney
for
Petitioner
7
Statement
of
Costs
Donna
Cole
15UPL022/15SA267
15-830
11/3/2015
Administrative
Fee
91.00
AMOUNT
DUE
91.00
Petitioner,
through
the
undersigned Assistant
Regulation
Counsel,
and
upon
authorization
pursuant
to
C.R.C.P.
234(a),’
respectfully
requests
that
the
Colorado
Supreme
Court
issue
an
order
pursuant
to
C.RC.P.
234
directing
Respondent
to
show
cause
why
she
should
not
be
enjoined
from
the
unauthorized
practice
of
law.
As
grounds,
counsel
states
as
follows:
The
Unauthorized
Practice
of
Law
(“UPL”)
Committee
authorized
the
filing
of
this
petition
on
September
11,
2015.
10PM
SUPREME
COURT,
STATE
OF
COLORADO
2
E.
l4t1
Ave.
Denver,
Colorado
$0203
ORIGINAL
PROCEEDING
IN
UNAUTHORIZED
PRACTICE
Of
LAW,
1
5UPL022
DATE
FILED:
October
8,
2015
3
FILING
ID:
909904
1DF294D
CASE
NUMBER:
2015SA267
Petitioner:
THE
PEOPLE
OF
THE
STATE
Of
COLORADO
Respondent:
DONNA
COLE,
d/b/a
PARK
PARALEGAL
A
COURT
USE
ONLYA
Case
Number:
Kim
E.
Ikeler,
#15590
Assistant
Regulation
Counsel
Attorney
for
Petitioner
1300
Broadway,
Suite
500
Denver,
Colorado
$0203
Telephone:
(303)
457-5$00x7863
fax
No.:
(303)
501-1
141
Email:
PETITION
FOR
INJUNCTION
JURISDICTION
1.
Respondent
Donna
Cole
is a
Colorado resident,
with
a
last
known
business
address
of
1743
B
Street,
Colorado
Springs,
CO
80906.
2.
Respondent
Cole
is
not
licensed
to
practice
law
in
Colorado
or
any
other
state.
3.
Respondent engaged
in
the
unauthorized
practice
of
law,
as
described
below.
GENERAL
ALLEGATIONS
A.
Background.
4.
Respondent
is
a
notary
public.
5.
Respondent
does
business
in
Colorado Springs under
the
trade
name
Park Paralegal.
6.
Respondent
advertised
online
at
www.parkparalegal.org.
7.
Respondent
also
advertised
on
Craigslist.
B.
Website.
8.
Respondent’s
website
offered
to
assist customers
with
“divorce,
custody, child
support, etc.”
9.
The
home
page
contained
a
disclaimer,
to
the
effect
that
Park
Paralegal
is
a
typing
service
and
cannot
give
legal
advice.
2
10.
However,
the
“Services”
page
listed
the
following
(each
for
$250):
divorce,
legal
separation,
custody,
modify
child
support,
motion
to
modify,
step
parent
adoption, custodial
adoption,
and
adult
adoption.
11.
The
“Services”
page
gave
the
customer
the
impression
that
Park
Paralegal
would
select
and
prepare
the
appropriate
forms
for
each
of
these
court
proceedings.
12.
On
a
page
titled
“Start
Now,”
Respondent
presented
links
to
questionnaires
she
had assembled
for
use
in
preparing
pleadings
appropriate for
the
type
of
domestic
relations
or
adoptions
case
the
customer
wished
to
commence.
13.
The
customer
clicked
on
the
link and
downloaded
the
questionnaire,
filled
in
the
blanks,
then
mailed
the
completed questionnaire
to
Respondent
for
typing
of
the
pleadings
in
final
form.
14.
for
example,
a
customer
who
wanted
a
divorce
could
download
a
questionnaire
consisting
of
(a)
a
“Fact
Sheet”
(created
by
Respondent)
with blanks
for
the
parties’
names,
contact
information,
date
of
birth
and
social
security
number;
(b)
portions
of
JDF
1000,
Case
Information
Sheet
(from
the
judicial
website);
(c)
portions
of
JDF
1101,
Petition
for
Dissolution
of
Marriage
(from
the
judicial
website);
and
portions
of
JDF
1115,
Separation
Agreement
(from
the
judicial
website).
3
15.
The
customer
filled
in
the
required
personal
and
financial information,
then
returned
the
questionnaire
to
Respondent,
who
used
the
information
to
complete
the
Petition, Separation
Agreement
and
related
pleadings.
16.
After
the
investigation
began,
Respondent
took
down
the
portion
of
the
“Start
Now” page
on
her website
that
provided
links
to
the
questionnaires.
C.
Advertising.
17.
Respondent
advertised
on
Craigslist.
18.
Respondent
offered
to
help
with “divorce,
custody, adoption,
name
change,
seal
of
records, immigration,
child
support,
modification
of
original
orders,
contempt
citations
and
much
more.”
19.
Respondent
listed
flat
fees
of
$150
for
a
low-cost
divorce
and
$50
to
$250
for “custody,
etc.”
20.
Respondent’s
fees
included
“all
forms,
copies,
notary
and
we
even
file
it
for
you.”
D.
Foster
Matter.
21.
Bret Foster
obtained
a
Judgment
of
dissolutIon
of
marriage
from
Krista
Foster
on
October
29,
2007.
Marriage
of
Bret
Thomas
foster
and
Krista
Nicole
Foster,
Superior
Court
of
California,
County
of
Merced,
Case
No.
30977
(the
“California
divorce
case”).
22.
There
were
three
children
of
the
marriage.
4
23.
Custody
of
the
children
was
the
subject
of
separate
juvenile
proceedings.
24.
Thereafter,
Krista
Foster
moved
with
the
children
to
Colorado
Springs,
Colorado.
25.
Bret
Foster
remained
in
Merced,
California.
26.
Bret
Foster
married
Hillary
Foster.
27.
Bret
foster
wished
to
resume
contact
with
his
children.
2$.
In
early
2013,
Hillary
Foster
found
the
Park
Paralegal
website
on
the
Internet.
29.
Hillary
Foster
contacted Respondent.
30.
Hillary
Foster
explained
that Bret
Foster
lived
out-of-state.
31.
Respondent
agreed
to
help
with
a
petition for
allocation
of
parental
responsibilities.
32.
On
February
13,
2013,
Hillary
Foster
paid
$250
to
Respondent
and
downloaded
a
questionnaire
from
the
website.
33.
Hilary
foster
completed
the
questionnaire.
34.
Respondent,
at
times
acting through
an
assistant
named
“Valerie,”
advised
Bret
Foster
he
would
need
to
change
venue
of
the
California
divorce
case
from
Merced
County,
California
to
El
Paso
County,
Colorado.
5
35.
Respondent
asked
Hillary
Foster
to
obtain
a
certified
copy
of
Bret
Foster’s divorce
decree.
36.
Respondent
told
Hillary
foster
that
Park
Paralegal
would charge
a
$175
fee
to
change
venue
to
El
Paso County
District
Court.
37.
On
March
5,
2013,
Respondent
e-rnailed
to
Hillary
Foster
a
pleading
selected
and
prepared
by
Park
Paralegal,
entitled
Petition
to
Register
Foreign
Decree
Pursuant
to
§
14-1
1-101.
C.R.S.
(‘Petition
to
Register”).
38.
Respondent
instructed
Hillary
Foster
to
have
Bret
Foster
sign
the
Petition
to
Register
before
a
notary,
and
return
it
to
Respondent
along
with
a
certified
copy
of
the
original
California
divorce
decree.
39.
Mr.
Foster
signed
the
Petition
to
Register
on
March
11,
2013.
40.
On
March
12,
2013,
Hillary
Foster
sent
the
signed
Petition
and
a
$125
check for
court
costs
to
Respondent
by
overnight
mail.
41.
On
March
26,
2013,
Respondent
filed
the
Petition
to
Register,
commencing
Bret
T.
Foster
v.
Krista
N.
Foster,
El
Paso
County
District
Court,
Case
No.
13DR1403
(the
“Colorado
parental
responsibilities
case”).
42.
On
July
26,
2013,
the
El
Paso
County
District
Court
ordered
that
Bret
Foster
to
serve
Krista
Foster
with
the
Petition
to
Register
within
thirty days.
43.
Respondent
called
Hillary
Foster
to
locate
the
ex-wife
for
service.
6
44.
On
the
questionnaire,
Hillary
foster
had
provided
Respondent
with
contact
information for
the
ex-wife,
Krista
foster.
45.
However,
Respondent
now
wanted
to
hire
a
private
investigator
to
find ex-wife.
46.
At
this
point,
communications
between
Park
Paralegal
and
Hillary
foster
ended.
47.
Krista
foster
was
not
served.
4$.
The
El
Paso County
District Court
dismissed
the
Colorado
parental
responsibilities
case
for
failure
to
prosecute.
49.
Hillary
foster
never
received
the
pleadings
for
an
allocation
of
parental
responsibilities
case.
E.
Parker
Matter.
50.
Trinity
Parker
had
a
dispute
with
Colorado
Christian
University.
51.
The
University
claimed
that
Ms.
Parker
owed
them
money.
52.
Respondent
agreed
that
this
was
an
invalid
debt.
53.
Respondent
promised
to
assist
Ms.
Parker
with
repairing
her
credit.
54.
On
February
25,
2014,
Ms.
Parker
paid
Respondent
$200
for
this
service.
55.
However,
Respondent
failed
to
send the
credit
repair
information
to
the
credit
bureau.
7
56.
Respondent
also
helped
Ms.
Parker
with
her
divorce.
57.
Ms.
Parker
paid
Respondent
$250
in
cash
for
this.
58.
Respondent
selected
and
prepared
the
divorce
forms.
59.
Respondent
sent the
forms
to
Ms.
Parker’s
ex-husband.
60.
The
ex-husband
failed
and
refused
to
sign the
divorce
forms.
61.
At
this
point,
Respondent
stopped
work.
62.
Respondent
did
not give
Ms.
Parker
a
copy
of
the
divorce
pleadings
that
Respondent
selected
and
prepared.
63.
A
year
later,
Ms.
Parker
stopped
by
Respondent’s
office.
64.
Ms.
Parker
asked
Respondent
what
could
be
done
to
recommence
the
divorce.
65.
At
this
point,
Ms.
Parker’s
ex-husband
had
moved
to
Alaska.
66.
Respondent
asked
for
$500
to
reopen
Ms.
Parker’s
file.
67.
Ms.
Parker
declined
this
offer.
F.
Baker
Matter.
68.
Kristin
Baker
was
moving
out-of-state,
and
wished
to
bring
her
daughter
with
her.
69. Ms.
Baker
contacted
Respondent,
who
agreed
to
help.
70.
Respondent
or
her
assistant,
“Ariel,”
selected
the
appropriate
pleading
forms
and
typed
in
Ms.
Baker’s information.
$
71.
For
these
services,
Ms.
Baker
paid
$200
through
PayPal
on
August
14,
2013.
G.
Ferguson
Matter.
72.
Gloria
Ferguson
(n!k/a
Gloria
Zavala)
decided
to
file
for
divorce.
73.
Ms.
Ferguson
contacted
Park
Paralegal
for
help.
74.
A
Park
Paralegal
employee
named
“Lucy”
selected
and
prepared
the
divorce
forms.
75.
Ms.
Ferguson
paid
Park
Paralegal
$500
for
these
services.
76.
“Lucy”
also
gave
Ms.
Ferguson
legal advice.
77.
In
particular,
Ms.
Ferguson
asked
“Lucy”
questions
about
child
support,
e.g.,
‘Do
I
have
to
have
the
child
support
be
what
the
state
says,
or
what
the
Judge
says?”
78.
“Lucy”
advised
Ms.
Ferguson
that
she
and
her
husband
could agree
to
pay
less
child
support
than
required
by the
statute.
79.
“Lucy”
also gave
Ms.
Ferguson
advice regarding
how
to
split
the
marital
property.
80.
On
June
12,
2013,
Ms.
Ferguson
and
her
ex-husband
filed
a
Petition
for
Dissolution
of
Marriage,
styled
In
the
Marriage
of
Gloria
E.
Ferguson
and
Matthew
E.
Ferguson,
El
Paso
County
District
Court,
Case
No.
13DR2705
(the
“divorce
case”).
9
$1.
On
the
same
day,
they
also filed
a
Separation
Agreement,
Parenting
Plan,
Domestic
Relations Information
Sheet,
and
proposed
Decree.
82.
These
pleadings
were
selected
and
prepared
by
Park
Paralegal
employee
“Lucy”.
83.
“Lucy”
told
Ms.
Ferguson
that
the
divorce
would
take
sixty
days.
84.
Thereafter,
Ms.
Ferguson
(who
is
in
the
Air
Force)
was
assigned
to
a
base
in
Tampa,
Florida,
and moved
there.
$5.
On
July
17,
2013,
the
Judge
in
the
divorce
case
issued
a
Delay
Prevention
Order (Domestic).
86.
The
Judge
noted
that
the
parties
had failed
to
appear
for
an
Initial
Status
Conference on
July
12,
2013.
$7.
Neither
Respondent
nor
anyone
else
from
Park
Paralegal
had
informed
Ms.
Ferguson
that
she
needed
to
attend
the Initial
Status
Conference.
8$.
Due
to
lack
of
that
information,
Ms.
Ferguson
missed
her
court
date.
$9.
After
another
month
or
more
had
passed,
Ms.
Ferguson
called
Park
Paralegal.
90.
Respondent
answered, and
told
Ms.
Ferguson
that
“Lucy”
wasntt
working
there
any
longer.
91.
Ms.
Ferguson faxed
her
divorce
pleadings
to
Respondent,
so
that
Respondent
could
continue
to
assist
on
the
divorce
case.
10
92.
Respondent selected
a
Motion
for Absentee
Testimony
and
a
Notice
to
Set.
93.
Respondent e-mailed
those
pleadings
to
Ms.
Ferguson
on
September
4,
2013.
94.
Respondent instructed
Ms.
ferguson
to
sign
and
return
the
pleadings,
so
that
Respondent
could
file
them.
95.
Respondent filed
the
Notice
to
Set
on
September
10,
2013.
96.
On
October
15,
2013, the
Judge
issued
a
Notice
of
Hearing
Regarding
final
Orders.
97.
The hearing
was
set
for
December
2,
2013.
9$.
Ms.
Ferguson filled
in
that
date
on
the
Motion
for
Absentee
Testimony,
signed
the
Motion
and
sent
it
to
Respondent.
99.
Respondent
filed
the
Motion
for
Absentee
Testimony
on
October
30,
2013.
100.
The
Decree
was
entered
on
January
31,
2014.
101.
Because
her
divorce took
months
longer than
it
should
have,
Ms.
Ferguson
was
unable
to
get
benefits
for her
children paid
by
the
Air
force.
102.
Instead,
her
husband continued
to
get
the
benefits, because
he
outranked
her.
11
103.
Ms.
Ferguson
had
to
pay
for food and
other
child
costs
out
of
pocket
until
she
was
divorced.
H.
Halpern
Matter.
104.
Nathan
Halpem
was
involved
in
post-decree
proceedings.
In
the
Marriage
of
Danielle
Hatpern
and
Nathan
Hatpern,
El
Paso
County
District
Court,
Case
No.
12DR2507
(the
“divorce
case”).
105.
Mr.
Halpem
needed
to
modify
his
child
support
obligation
after
receiving
a
medical discharge
from the
Army.
106.
At
the
time,
he
was
living
in
Garden
Grove,
California.
107.
On
October
10,
2014,
he
contacted
Respondent,
who
agreed
to
help.
10$.
Mr.
Halpem
paid
Park
Paralegal
$250
on
November
4,
2014.
109.
Respondent
selected
the
form
for
a
motion for
modification.
110.
Mr.
Halpem
gave
Respondent
a
copy
of
his
divorce
decree.
111.
Respondent
or
an
employee
used
the
information
to
prepare the
motion
to
modify.
112.
Park
Paralegal
sent
the
draft
motion
to
Mr.
Halpem,
who
signed
it
before
a
notary.
113.
On
November
21,
2014,
Respondent
filed
for
Mr.
Halpem
a
Verified
Motion
to
Modify
Child
Support.
114.
The
judge
initially
granted
the
motion,
because
there
was
no
response.
12
115.
The
certificate
of
mailing
stated
that the
Motion
had
been mailed
to
Mr.
Halpern’s
ex-wife
on
November
17.
116.
However,
after
the
motion
was
granted,
Danielle
Halpem
filed
an
objection,
demonstrating
that
in
fact,
the
motion
was
not
mailed
to
her
until
November
25.
117.
The
judge
set
aside
the
first
order
and
denied
the
motion.
118.
Mr.
Halpem
blames
Respondent
for
the
mistaken
certificate
of
service
on
the
motion.
I.
Silvas
Matter.
119.
Jennifer
Cahill
Silvas
and
Adam
Mitchell
Silvas
decided
to
divorce.
120.
The
Silvases
asked
Respondent
for
help.
121.
Respondent
selected
and
prepared
the divorce
pleadings.
122.
Respondent
also
advised
Ms.
Silvas
about
the
divorce
process.
123.
Ms.
Silvas
paid
Respondent
$250
on
March
31,
2015.
124.
On
April
20, 2015,
the
divorce
case
was
commenced
with
the
filing
of
a
Petition
for
Dissolution,
a
Domestic
Relations
Information
Sheet,
a
Parenting
Plan,
a
Separation
Agreement,
and
a
proposed
Decree.
In
the
Marriage
of
Jemztfer
ahili
Silvas
and
Adam
Mitchell
Silvas,
El
Paso
County
District
Court,
Case
No.
15DR1389.
13
J.
Matthews
Matter.
125.
Kelly
Matthews
and
her
husband
wanted
to
divorce.
126.
Mr.
and Ms.
Matthews
talked
to
Respondent
at
her
office.
127.
Respondent
selected
and
prepared
the
pleadings
to
begin
the
case:
a
Petition
for
Dissolution
of
Marriage,
a
Domestic
Relations
Information
Sheet,
a
Separation
Agreement
and
an
Affidavit
for
Decree
without Appearance
of
Parties.
128.
The
Matthews
paid
Respondent
$225
on
June
12,
2014.
129.
On
June
18,
2014,
Ms.
Matthews
and
her
husband
commenced
In
re
Marriage
of
Kelly
C.
Matthews
and
Charles
C’.
Matthews,
El
Paso
County
District
Court,
Case
No.
14DR2026.
130.
However,
they
did
not
proceed
with
the
divorce.
K.
Failla
Matter.
131.
Bernadette
Failla
used
Respondent’s services
for
two
divorces,
in
the
Marriage
of
Bernadette
Faitta
and Patrick
Grob,
El
Paso
County District
Court,
Case
No.
1
1DR2722
and
In
the
Marriage
of
Bernadette
A.
Faitla and
Ricicy
R.
Totfa,
El
Paso
County
District
Court,
Case
No.
14DR2986.
132.
For
each
divorce,
Respondent
selected
and
prepared
the
pleadings.
133.
Ms.
Failla
paid
$250
to
Respondent
for
the
two
divorces.
134.
Ms.
Failla
used
Respondent
because
she
was
the
only
one
available
to
file
a
divorce
on-line.
14
L
Schaefer
Matter.
135.
Andrew
Schaefer
was
divorced.
In
the
Marriage
of
Tuyen
Truc
Tran
and
Andrew
Thomas
Schaefer,
El
Paso
County
District
Court,
Case
No.
13DR545.
136.
Mr.
Schaefer
used
Respondent’s
services when
he
needed
to
modify
his
child
support
obligation.
137.
Mr.
Schaefer
paid
Respondent
$250
on
November
10,
2014.
138.
Respondent
selected
and
prepared
a
motion
to
modify.
139.
However,
Mr.
Schaefer
was
dissatisfied with
Respondent’s
product
because
of
the
many
errors
it
contained.
140.
Mr.
Schaefer
decided
not
to
use
the
forms.
M.
Gaines
Matter.
141.
Demetrius
Gaines
went
to
Park
Paralegal
for
assistance
with
a
divorce.
142.
Respondent
selected
and
prepared
the
pleadings.
143.
Mr.
Gaines
paid
$200
cash
for
Park
Paralegal’s
services.
144.
Then
Mr.
Gaines
and his
wife
stopped
the
process.
145.
Mr.
and
Ms.
Gaines
restarted
again
this
year.
146.
Mr.
Gaines
again
called
Park Paralegal.
147.
An
employee
told him
he
had
to
fill
out
a
new
form
and
pay
another
$125
for the
2015
divorce.
15
14$.
On
March
31,
2015,
Mr.
Gaines
paid
Park
Paralegal
$125
on
line.
149.
An
employee
of
Park
Paralegal
again
selected
and
prepared
the
pleadings,
including
a
Petition
for
Dissolution
of
Marriage,
Separation
Agreement,
Affidavit
for
Decree
without
Appearance,
and
Financial
Statement.
In
the
Marriage
of
Demetrius
Machon
Gaines
and
Nichetle
C’hante
Brown,
El
Paso
County
District
Court,
Case
No.
15DR1710.
N.
Statement
as
to
Harm.
150.
In
addition
to
the
harm
discussed
above,
Respondent
has not
refunded
fees
to
any
of
her
customers.
REQUEST
FOR
RELIEF
151.
The
unauthorized
practice
of
law
includes
holding
oneself
out
as
able
to
provide
services
that
can
be
done only
by
a
licensed
lawyer
and
thereby
soliciting
legal
business
to
be
performed
for
a
fee.
Unauthorized
Practice
of
Law
Committee
v.
Grimes,
654
P.2d
822,
825
(Cob.
1982)
(Grimes
engaged
in
the
unauthorized
practice
of
law,
inter
cilia,
by
advertising
his
services
as
a
drafter
of
legal
pleadings
in
the
newspaper
and
phone
book
under
headings
for
“lawyers”
and
“legal
counsel”).
See
also People
ex
rel.
Attorney
General
v.
castleman,
88
Cob.
207,
294
p.
535
(1930)
(unlicensed
person
who
advertised
himself
on
business
card
as
a
lawyer engaged
in
the
unauthorized
practice
of
law);
People
ex
ret.
Colorado
Bar
Ass’iz
V.
Taylor,
56
Cob.
441,
138
P.
762
(1914)
(unlicensed
person
16
who
advertised
himself
including
on
business
card
as
a
lawyer
guilty
of
contempt
of
the
Supreme Court);
Binkley
v.
People,
716
P.2d
1111,
1114
(Cob.
1986)
(“Anyone
advertising
as
a
lawyer
holds
himself
or
herself
out
as
an
attorney,
attorney-at-law, or counselor-at-law
and,
if
not
properly licensed,
may
be
held
in
contempt
of
court
for
practicing
law
without
a
license.”).
152.
Respondent
engaged
in
the
unauthorized
practice
of
law
by
advertising
on
Craigslist,
offering
assistance
with
a
variety
of
domestic
relations
matters.
153.
The
advertisement
gave the
reader
the
impression
that
Respondent
was
authorized
to
select
and
prepare
the
forms
for
these
matters.
154.
Respondent
also
engaged
in
the
unauthorized
practice
of
law
by
providing
a
link
on
her
website
to
a
questionnaire,
which the
customer
could
complete.
155.
Respondent
or
her
employees
would
then select
and
prepare
domestic
relations
forms
using
it.
156.
The
unauthorized
practice
of
law
also
includes
but
is
not
limited
to
an
unlicensed
person’s
actions
as
a
representative
in
protecting,
enforcing
or
defending
the
legal
rights
and
duties
of
another
and/or
counseling,
advising
and
assisting that
person
in
connection
with
legal
rights
and
duties.
See
People
v.
Shell,
148
P.3d
162
(Cob.
2006);
Denver
BarAssn.
v.
P.U.C’.,
154
Cob.
273,
391
‘7
P.2d
467 (1964).
Prohibited
activities
involve
the
lay
exercise
of
legal
discretion,
such
as
advice
to
clients
regarding
legal
matters.
People
v.
Adams,
243
P.3d
256,
266
(Cob.
2010).
157.
Respondent engaged
in
the
unauthorized
practice
of
law,
as
follows.
158.
Respondent
advised
Hillary
and
Bret
Foster
to
seek
a
change
of
venue
of
the
California
divorce
case
to
the
El
Paso
County Court,
as
a
means
of
pursuing
a
reunification
with
Bret Foster’s
children.
159.
Respondent
selected
and
prepared
the
Petition
to
Register
for
Bret
Foster’s
signature, which
Respondent then
filed
to
commence
the
Colorado
parental responsibilities
case.
160.
Respondent
supplied
Hillary
foster
with
a
questionnaire,
for the
purpose
of
generating
pleadings
for
allocation
of
parental responsibilities.
161.
Respondent
advised
Trinity
Parker
that
her
debt
to
Colorado
Christian
University
was not
valid.
162.
Respondent
selected
and
prepared
forms
for
Ms.
Parker’s divorce.
163.
Respondent’s
employee,
“Lucy”,
advised Gloria Ferguson
regarding
child
support
and
the
division
of
marital
property.
164.
Respondent
and
her employee
selected
and
prepared
pleadings
to
be
filed
in
Ms.
Ferguson’s
divorce
case.
18
165.
Respondent
or
her
employees
selected
and
prepared
divorce
pleadings
for
Kristin Baker,
Nathan
Halpem,
Jennifer
Silvas,
Kelly
Matthews,
Bernadette
Failla,
Andrew
Schaefer,
and
Demetrius
Gaines.
166.
Respondent
does
not
fall
within
any
of
the
case
law
or
statutory
exceptions.
WHEREFORE,
the
Petitioner
prays
that
this
Court
issue
an
order
directing
Respondent
to
show
cause
why
Respondent
should
not
be
enjoined
from
engaging
in
any
unauthorized
practice
of
law;
thereafter
that
the
Court
enjoin
Respondent
from
the
practice
of
law,
or
in
the
alternative
that
this
court
refer
this
matter
to
a
hearing
master
for
determination
of
facts
and
recommendations
to
the
Court
on
whether
Respondent
should
be
enjoined
from
the
unauthorized
practice
of
law.
Furthermore,
Petitioner
requests
that
the
Court
assess
the
costs
and
expenses
of
these
proceedings
against
Respondent;
impose
a
fine
for
each
incident
of
unauthorized
practice
of
law,
not
less
than
$250.00
and
not
more
than
$1,000.00;
order
restitution;
and
any
other
relief
deemed
appropriate
by
this
Court.
DATED
this
8th
day
of
October,
2015.
Respectfully
submitted,
Kim
E.
Ikeler,
#15590
Assistant
Regulation
Counsel
Attorney
for Petitioner
19
EXHIBIT
B
TO
STIPULATION
IN
2015SA267
1.
Hillaiy
Foster,
1053
El
Portal,
Merced,
CA
95340,
$250
plus
interest
at
8%
per
annum
from
February
14,
2013
through
October
31,
2015,
in
the
total
amount
of
$300.10
plus
$.05
per
diem
thereafter
until
paid.
2.
Trinity
Parker,
4980
Ironhorse
Trial,
Colorado
Springs,
CO
80917,
$250
plus
interest
at 8%
per
annum
from
April
1,2014
through
October
31,
2015,
in
the
total
amount
of
$278.90,
plus
$.05
per
diem
thereafter
until
paid.
3.
Kristin
Baker,
3570
5.
Tower
Ave.,
Chandler,
AZ
$5286,
$200
plus
interest
at
8%
per
annum
from
August
14,
2013
through
October
31,
2015,
in
the
total
amount
of
$236.64,
plus
$.04
per
diem
thereafter
until
paid.
4.
Gloria
Ferguson,
6109
Gannetwood,
Lithia,
FL
33547,
$500.
5.
Nathan
Halpern,
12612
Lampson
Ave.,
Garden
Grove,
CA
92840,
$250
plus
interest
at 8%
per
annum
from
November
4,
2014
through
October
31,
2015,
in
the
total
amount
of
$268.25,
plus
$.05
per
diem
thereafter
until
paid.
6.
Jennifer
Cahill
Silvas,
7524
Jaoul
Pt.,
Peyton,
CO
80831,
$250
plus
interest
at 8%
per
annum
from
March
31,
2015
through
October
31,
2015,
in
the
total
amount
of
$262.25,
plus
$.05
per
diem
thereafter
until
paid.
7.
Kelly
Matthews,
7620
Sandy
Springs
Point,
Fountain,
CO
$0817,
$225
plus
interest
at 8%
per
annum
from
June
12,
2014
through
October31,
2015,
in
the
total
amount
of
$250.90,
plus
$.05
per
diem
thereafter
until
paid.
8.
Bernadette
Failia, Unit
3050,
BPO
AA
34025,
$250.
9.
Andrew
Schaefer,
5714
Wolf
Village
Drive,
Colorado
Springs,
CO
80924,
$250
plus interest
at 8%
per
annum
from
November
10,
2014
through
October
31,
2015,
in
the
total
amount
of
$268.25,
plus
$.05
per
diem
thereafter
until
paid.
10.
Demetrius
Gains,
613
Caines
Rd.,
Hinesville,
GA
31313,
$200
plus
interest
at 8%
per
annum
from
April
1,2015
through
October
31,
2015,
in
the
total
amount
of
$208.56,
plus
$.04
per
diem
thereafter
until
paid;
and
$125
plus
interest
thereon
at
8%
per
annum
from
March
31,
2015
through
October
31,
2015,
in
the
total
amount
of
$132.35,
plus
$.03
per
diem
thereafter
until
paid.
8
EXHIBIT
