In re Hongisto
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Opinion of the Court
¶ 1. We granted review of two decisions from the Hearing Panel of the Professional Responsibility Board *554(PRB) concerning four complaints claiming violations of the Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct, which resulted in two concurrent six-month suspensions. We affirm the decisions of the Panel suspending respondent Eileen Hongisto from the practice of law for two six-month periods to run concurrently. Additionally, as a condition to her reinstatement, we require that, at the time that respondent applies for reinstatement, she must provide the Board with a detailed explanation for her lack of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- In Re BerkSupreme Court of Vermont · 1991
- In Re FarrarSupreme Court of Vermont · 2008
- In re AndresSupreme Court of Vermont · 2004
- In Re BucknamSupreme Court of Vermont · 1993
- In Re BaileySupreme Court of Vermont · 1991
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Budding v. Iowa Department of Job ServiceCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 1983
- In re Melvin FinkSupreme Court of Vermont · 2011
- In re Strouse, Esq.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2011
- In re Joseph P. Palmisano, Esq.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2017
- In re Phyllis McCoy Jacien, Esq.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2018
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.