Legal Opinion
In Re Anderson
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided August 2, 2001No. 00-BG-230PublishedCited by 88 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FARRELL, Associate Judge:
The Board on Professional Responsibility (the Board) has recommended that respondent be suspended from practicing law in the District of Columbia for six months. The proposed discipline stems from findings by a Hearing Committee, accepted by the Board, that respondent had violated three Rules of Professional Conduct: Rule 1.15(a) (commingling and misappropriation); Rule 1.15(b) (failure to notify and deliver funds to third-party claimant); and Rule 1.17(a) (failure to designate trust or escrow account). Contrary to the determination of the Hearing Committee, however,…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Matter of AddamsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- In Re KerseyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
- In Re MicheelDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- In Re HarrisonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- In Re HesslerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by88 opinions
- In Re CaterDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- In Re Cleaver-BascombeDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006
- In re MartinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2013
- In Re BaileyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- In Re FairDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
83 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.