Legal Opinion
In Re Confidential
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided September 11, 1995No. 94-BG-886PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
STEADMAN, Associate Judge:
Respondent was charged by Bar Counsel with violating Disciplinary Rule (“DR”) 9-103(A), which deals with commingling and misuse of clients’ funds. The escrow which Respondent was charged with mishandling came about in connection with, a real estate transaction in Maryland. Respondent was a principal to that transaction, one of the two sellers of the property. Respondent is not admitted to practice as an attorney in Maryland, a fact of which the complaining buyer was aware. On the particular facts of this ease, we reject the exception of Bar Counsel to the order of…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Matter of AddamsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- In Re HesslerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- In Re KennedyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- In Re GilDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995
- Matter of BurtonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- In Re BelliDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
- In re Nathaniel H. SpeightsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2018