Legal Opinion

Matter of Kent

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided October 20, 1983No. M-96-81PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Per curiam

This disciplinary matter is before the court on the Report and Recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility (Board), which found that respondent had engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, in violation of DR 1-102(A)(4), and recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for a year and a day. We accept the Board’s findings of fact, but reject the recommended discipline. We order that respondent be suspended from practice for 30 days.

Respondent is 33 years old and, until July 1981, was a trial attorney with the United States Department of Justice. Although she…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Matter of HauptDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. Matter of FogelDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
  3. Matter of WillcherDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
  4. Matter of VogelDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978
  5. Matter of O'BryantDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1981

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. In Re HutchinsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. Matter of ShorterDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
  3. In Re McBrideDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
  4. In Re KennedyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
  5. In Re SlatteryDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API