Legal Opinion

In re Watkins

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided August 25, 2005No. 04-BG-1240Published

1Per curiam

Respondent Albert S. Watkins was publicly reprimanded by the Supreme Court of Missouri for improperly disclosing confidential information and representing two clients with conflicting interests. The Board on Professional Responsibility (“Board”) determined that respondent’s conduct violated Rules 1.6 and 1.7 of the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct, and recommends that we impose reciprocal discipline in the form of a public censure.

A public censure is functionally equivalent to the public reprimand imposed in Missouri. See In re Bailey, 759 A.2d 1076, 1076 (D.C.2000). In…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In Re ZilberbergDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
  2. In Re AnyaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
  3. In re BaileyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API