Legal Opinion
In Re Huber
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided March 19, 1998No. 95-BG-35PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
STEADMAN, Associate Judge.
Already temporarily suspended from the practice of law by this court’s order of March 8, 1995, respondent Richard L. Huber on March 3, 1997, filed an affidavit consenting to the entry of an order of disbarment. The only issues before us relate to the recommendations of the Board on Professional Responsibility that the order of disbarment 1) provide for the payment of interest on restitution payments made or to be made, and 2) be effective only as of the time that respondent shall have filed an affidavit pursuant to D.C. Bar Rule XI, § 14(g). We adopt the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Riggs National Bank of Washington, D.C. v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- In Re SlosbergDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
- Matter of JamesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
- Bingham v. Goldberg. Marchesano. Kohlman. Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
- In Re GardnerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- In Re HagerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002
- In Re SoininenDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004
- Johnson v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1999
- Burke v. Groover, Christie & Merritt, P.C.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2011
- In Re HewettDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2011
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.