Legal Opinion

In re Merritt-Bagwell

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided May 14, 2015No. 14-BG-849Published

1Per curiam

Having found by clear and convincing evidence that respondent, Andrea Merritt *875Bagwell, violated District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1(b) (failure to act with skill and care); 1.15 (a) (intentional or reckless misappropriation); 1.3(a) (failure to act zealously and diligently); 1.3(b)(2) (intentionally damaging or prejudicing a client); 1.3(c) (failure to act promptly); 8.4(c) (dishonesty); and 8.4(d) (serious interference with administration of justice), the Board on Professional Responsibility (“Board”) recommended that the respondent be disbarred, that execution of the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Matter of AddamsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
  2. In Re KerseyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
  3. In re SamadDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2012
  4. In Re WechslerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
  5. In Re MooersDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006

4 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