In re Wood

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in March 1997. He lives and works in England.

Having granted petitioner’s motion for an order declaring that the petition of charges and respondent’s answer raised no factual issues and having considered respondent’s papers in mitigation, we now find respondent guilty of serious professional misconduct as charged.

Respondent engaged in illegal conduct in violation of the attorney discipline rules by making misrepresentations to British government agencies to obtain unemployment and housing benefits (see Code of Professional Responsibility DR…