Legal Opinion
In Re Chasnoff
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided June 12, 2003No. 01-BG-1578PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Per curiam
On October 15, 2001, the Court of Appeals of Maryland indefinitely suspended respondent, Joel Chasnoff, for misconduct in his representation of three clients. Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Md. v. Chasnoff, 366 Md. 250, 783 A.2d 224 (2001). Respondent’s misconduct included failing to act with competence, failing to act with diligence, failing to communicate with his clients, charging an excessive fee, and failing to respond to disciplinary authorities.
Respondent reported his suspension to Bar Counsel as required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 11(b). This court temporarily suspended respondent on January…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- In Re GoldsboroughDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995
- In Re BergDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
- Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. ChasnoffCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
- In Re FreedDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
3Cited by2 opinions
- In Re PowersDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003
- In re ChasnoffDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005