Attorney Grievance Commission v. David
Court of Appeals of Maryland
1Opinion of the Court
McAULIFFE, Judge.
Respondent George Franklin David IV was admitted to the Bar of the State of Maryland on 9 December 1982. He maintains a solo, general practice in Baltimore. The events leading up to the present disciplinary action occurred between 1990 and 1992 and involve respondent’s handling of the cases of four former clients.
Petitioner Attorney Grievance Commission (AGC) commenced the present disciplinary action after receiving several complaints from former clients of respondent. The AGC filed a Petition for Disciplinary Action against him in this Court on 19 October 1992. We entered an…
2Cited by30 opinions
- Attorney Grievance Commission v. MooneyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000
- Attorney Grievance Commission v. MonfriedCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
- Attorney Grievance Commission v. GarfieldCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
- Attorney Grievance Commission v. FezellCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000
- ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COM'N OF MARYLAND v. BriscoeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.