Legal Opinion
In Re Stanton
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided November 30, 1983No. 83-142PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Per curiam
This matter is before us for our consideration of the Report and Recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility.
The Board finds two separate acts of “neglect of a legal matter ... ”, 6 DR § 101(A)(3), and two separate instances of “intentional failure to seek a client’s lawful objectives.” 7 DR § 101(A)(1). The Board recommends suspension for a year and a day. We adopt the Board’s recommendation.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED by the court that respondent John J. Stanton, be, and hereby is suspended for a year and a day from the practice of law for the reasons set forth in the appended…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Matter of HauptDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
- Matter of WhitlockDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
- Matter of FogelDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
- Matter of RussellDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
- Matter of HauptDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- John Stanton v. District of Columbia Court of AppealsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1997
- In Re StantonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- In Re SandgroundDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- In re SamadDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2012
- In Re ChisholmDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.