In re Merritt-Bagwell
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
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
- Matter of AddamsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- In Re KerseyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
- In re SamadDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2012
- In Re WechslerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
- In Re MooersDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.