Legal Opinion
In Re Lockie
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided October 24, 1994No. 92-BG-1338PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Per curiam
In its Report and Recommendation, the Board on Professional Responsibility (“the Board”) recommended that respondent John H. Lockie be suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for a period of thirty days, and be required to prove his fitness as a condition of reinstatement, based upon its finding that respondent had violated the following disciplinary rules: Rule 8.4(d) of the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct (serious interference with the administration of justice), and D.C.Bar R. XI, § 2(b)(3) (failure and refusal to respond to an order of the Board).…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- In Re HutchinsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
- In Re SteeleDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
- In Re DietzDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
- In Re SiegelDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
- In Re SolomonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1991
3Cited by22 opinions
- In Re DelaneyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
- In Re CaterDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- In Re LewisDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
- In Re ArtisDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- In Re GodetteDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.