Facts
- Alison Maynard was licensed to practice law in Colorado, but her license was temporarily suspended for prior discipline.
- During her suspension, Maynard repeatedly assisted self-represented litigants by drafting litigation documents (including briefs and other filings) and giving case-specific legal advice.
- Maynard described her assistance online as “behind-the-scenes” work and asserted she was not practicing law because she did not enter appearances, did not formally represent the litigants, and did not charge fees.
- Her online posts indicated that she assisted litigants in multiple states where she was not licensed.
- Maynard publicly expressed the belief that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting did not occur and focused much of her assistance on litigants who shared that belief.
- In a Wisconsin action involving a Sandy Hook victim’s family, a pro se defendant who was subject to a confidentiality agreement and protective order provided Maynard with a deposition video and transcript containing sensitive personal information about a deponent.
- Maynard distributed the confidential deposition materials to others and posted them online despite the confidentiality restrictions.
- The disclosure increased danger to the deponent and the deponent’s family, who had already relocated multiple times due to credible death threats tied to Sandy Hook conspiracy claims.
- Maynard filed ethics complaints against the deponent’s lawyer that disciplinary authorities characterized as frivolous.
- Colorado disciplinary authorities filed a complaint alleging unauthorized practice of law while suspended and related misconduct; Maynard did not respond, and default entered, making the allegations deemed admitted for purposes of sanctions.
Issues
- Whether a Colorado lawyer under suspension engages in unauthorized practice of law by ghostwriting pleadings and briefs and giving case-specific legal advice to pro se litigants, including in jurisdictions where the lawyer is not licensed.
- Whether receiving, distributing, and publishing deposition materials subject to a confidentiality agreement or protective order constitutes professional misconduct warranting severe discipline.
- Whether Maynard’s asserted First Amendment or petitioning-rights defense (including reliance on Protect Our Mountain Environment, Inc. v. District Court) bars attorney discipline for providing legal services while suspended.
- What sanction is appropriate where the respondent defaults and the misconduct includes a pattern of unauthorized practice and dissemination of confidential materials that creates serious risk of harm.
Decision
- The Presiding Disciplinary Judge treated the well-pleaded, defaulted allegations as admitted and proceeded to determine rule violations and sanction.
- The court concluded that Maynard practiced law while suspended by drafting litigation documents and giving legal advice to self-represented litigants; the absence of an appearance or fee did not change the character of the work.
- The court rejected the claim that helping pro se litigants is exempt from regulation when the assistance consists of legal strategy and drafting documents meant to be filed in court.
- The court found Maynard’s distribution and online posting of deposition materials covered by confidentiality restrictions to be serious misconduct, particularly because it exposed sensitive personal information and increased the risk of harm to the deponent and family members.
- The court found the frivolous ethics complaints and Maynard’s failure to participate in the disciplinary process to be aggravating conduct.
- Applying the ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, the court determined that the misconduct was knowing, part of a pattern, and caused actual and potential harm, with substantial aggravation and little or no mitigation.
- The court ordered Maynard disbarred from the practice of law in Colorado and assessed costs.
Legal Principles
- The “practice of law” includes giving legal advice and preparing pleadings, motions, and briefs for use in court; it is not limited to entering an appearance or charging a fee.
- A lawyer who is suspended may not provide legal services for others; doing so is unauthorized practice and violates professional-conduct duties and the suspension order.
- A lawyer may be disciplined in Colorado for conduct connected to litigation in other states when the conduct violates Colorado’s professional-conduct rules and threatens the integrity of judicial proceedings.
- Knowingly violating confidentiality agreements or protective orders—especially by publishing protected deposition materials—supports severe discipline when it exposes sensitive information and creates substantial risk of harm.
- First Amendment protections for petitioning activity do not give a suspended lawyer a right to provide legal services in violation of a suspension order; discipline may rest on the lawyer’s conduct as a regulated professional rather than the lawyer’s viewpoints.
- Default in an attorney-discipline case results in admitted allegations, and noncooperation is an aggravating factor in selecting the sanction.
- Discipline is imposed to protect the public and the courts and to maintain confidence in the legal system; disbarment is appropriate where a lawyer knowingly engages in ongoing unauthorized practice and other serious misconduct with significant aggravating factors.
Conclusion
People v. Maynard imposed disbarment on a Colorado lawyer who, while suspended, continued to provide legal services by ghostwriting court filings and giving legal advice to pro se litigants (including in other states), distributed and posted online confidential deposition materials subject to Wisconsin confidentiality restrictions in a way that increased safety risks to a deponent and family, filed frivolous ethics complaints, and then defaulted in the Colorado disciplinary proceeding, leading the court to conclude that disbarment was necessary to protect the public and the justice system.