Opinion ID: 2637826
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Depositions of Mr. E and the Parties' Adult Son Result in Respondent's Disqualification

Text: By late October, in preparation for temporary orders, Respondent discovered that Mr. E had subpoenaed the parties' adult son to the temporary orders hearing. Sometime before the deposition of the parties' adult son, Mrs. E and her adult son had a falling out as a result of Respondent's relationship with Mrs. E. Mr. E's lawyer deposed Mrs. E earlier on the same day that Respondent deposed the parties' adult son. Before Mr. E's attorney started questioning Mrs. E during her deposition, Respondent made a record in which he accused the parties' adult son of entering Mrs. E's home uninvited and spying on her, at Mr. E's direction. Respondent also warned the parties' adult son that he would call the police and have him arrested if he continued to enter the marital residence without Mrs. E's permission. After addressing the dispute over the adult son's access to the home, Mr. E's lawyer conducted the deposition of Mrs. E. During the deposition, Mr. E's lawyer asked Mrs. E if she and Respondent had traveled to Belize together while Respondent represented her. While Mrs. E admitted they had traveled to Belize, she testified that it was a business trip related to Respondent's ex-wife's divorce. Mrs. E denied that she and Respondent had a romantic relationship or that Respondent had ever spent the night at her home in Colorado. [12] Nevertheless, Mrs. E admitted in these disciplinary proceedings that she and Respondent slept together at her residence, but denied that they engaged in sex at anytime. In addition to asking whether Mrs. E had traveled to Belize with Respondent, Mr. E's lawyer asked her if she had any affairs during her marriage to Mr. E. He also asked Mrs. E if she had told the parties' adult children that their father had sexually abused them. Mrs. E answered that she had not told the children, but rather they had told her of the assaults. Mrs. E then detailed what her children had allegedly told her about Mr. E's sexual misconduct concerning the children as well as his affairs and other sexual improprieties that occurred during the marriage. [13] In response to Mrs. E's detailed account of Mr. E's alleged sexually abusive conduct, Mr. E's lawyer stated to Mrs. E, Okay. And all of this stuff you just told me, of what relevance is that in this case? Mrs. E answered, It might explain partially why I don't want to continue being married to the man. At that point, Mr. E's lawyer stipulated on the record that the marriage was irretrievably broken. Mrs. E continued, [w]ell, because perhaps it's not safe to have a predator out on the streets. Mrs. E and Respondent agreed that Mr. E's lawyer questioned her in an accusatory, sarcastic, and badgering manner. Mrs. E described Mr. E's lawyer as a bull in a china closet. Before Mrs. E's deposition, she and Respondent went to lunch and planned the examination of Mr. E, which had been scheduled that same afternoon. Mrs. E testified that she felt the need to tell her side of the story and respond to the manner in which Mr. E's attorney conducted her deposition. Mrs. E understood, planned, and approved of the strategy Respondent used in his questioning of her husband and the parties' adult son in depositions.