Legal Opinion
In Re Mitchell
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided March 18, 1999No. 97-BG-1630PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RUIZ, Associate Judge:
The Board on Professional Responsibility (“the Board”) has recommended that respondent, Iverson 0. Mitchell, be publicly censured for violating three rules of professional conduct: 1.15(b) (failure to promptly deliver to a client any funds that he or she is entitled to receive); 1.16(d) (failure to take timely steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client’s interests); and 8.4(c) (misrepresentation). Respondent’s main contention before this court is that the United States Bankruptcy Code prevented him from complying with the rules of professional conduct…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Begier v. Internal Revenue ServiceSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- In Re RebackDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
- Matter of HauptDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
- In Re GoffeDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
- In Re RyanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- In Re CaterDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- In Re AndersonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
- In Re ManceDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
- In Re ArnejaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002
- In Re EdwardsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.