Ziankovich v. Large

<p>FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT October 23, 2020 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court YOURAS ZIANKOVICH, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. No. 20-1030 (D.C. No. 1:17-CV-02039-CMA-NYW) BRYON M. LARGE; JESSICA E. (D. Colo.) YATES, Defendants - Appellees. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________ Before HARTZ, McHUGH, and CARSON, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Plaintiff Youras Ziankovich, an attorney representing himself, appeals from the district court’s decision granting summary judgment in favor of defendants Bryon M. Large and Jessica E. Yates and dismissing his amended complaint with prejudice. He also appeals from the district court’s denial of his post-judgment motion seeking relief under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Exercising jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we apply the firm waiver rule * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. as a bar to appellate review of the district court’s summary judgment decision and dismiss that portion of the appeal. We affirm the district court’s denial of the Rule 60(b) motion. I. Background Mr. Ziankovich is licensed to practice law in New York. Although he did not have a Colorado law license, he maintained a law office in Colorado and practiced immigration law before the United States District Court for the District of Colorado, the Executive Office of Immigration Review, and the Department of Homeland Security.1 Ms. Yates is Colorado’s Attorney Regulation Counsel and was appointed by the Colorado Supreme Court to regulate the practice of law in Colorado. Mr. Large is an attorney for Colorado’s Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel (“OARC”). The dispute underlying this appeal arises out of OARC’s disciplinary action against Mr. Ziankovich for violating the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct and the federal complaint he filed to challenge that disciplinary action.2 Mr. Large, through OARC, filed a complaint against Mr. Ziankovich on behalf of the People of Colorado (“the People”). Mr. Ziankovich moved to dismiss the disciplinary action against him on the grounds that OARC lacked jurisdiction to investigate and sanction attorneys with law licenses from other states and with 1 Mr. Ziankovich no longer resides in or maintains a law office in Colorado. 2 At the time that OARC commenced the disciplinary action, James Coyle was Colorado’s Attorney Regulation Counsel. He was later replaced by Ms. Yates. 2 practices limited to federal court matters. The presiding disciplinary judge (PDJ) denied the motion to dismiss, concluding there was jurisdiction over Mr. Ziankovich. The PDJ subsequently granted summary judgment in favor of the People on ...</p><br>
<a href="/opinion/4799767/ziankovich-v-large/">Original document</a>
Share Review:
Yes it is. Based on the user review published on NO-SCAM.com, it is strongly advised to avoid Ziankovich v. Large in any dealing and transaction.
Not really. In spite of the review published here, there has been no response from Ziankovich v. Large. Lack of accountability is a major factor in determining trust.
Because unlike No-Scam.com, other websites get paid to remove negative reviews and replace them with fake positive ones.
Ziankovich v. Large is rated 1 out of 5 based on the reviews submitted by our users and is marked as POOR.
Never trust websites which offer a shady ‘advocacy package’ to businesses. Search for relevant reviews on Ripoff Report and Pissed Consumer to see more unbiased reviews.
The above review and comments against Ziankovich v. Large were submitted by NO-SCAM.com user(s) and have been published as-is. NO-SCAM.com does not edit, alter or remove content published by it’s users. There’s no amount of money a business can pay to manipulate their reviews or complaints and NO-SCAM.com will NOT entertain any request to remove the review on Ziankovich v. Large at any cost whatsoever.
>