Legal Opinion
In Re Hewett
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided January 13, 2011No. 07-BG-624PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RUIZ, Associate Judge:
In this case, we determine, for the first time, that the presumptive rule of disbarment established in In re Addams, 579 A.2d 190, 191 (D.C.1990) (en banc), should not be imposed as a sanction for intentional misappropriation. We adopt the Board on Professional Responsibility’s uncontested finding that respondent misappropriated client funds but, unlike the Board, conclude that the misappropriation was intentional, not negligent. However, we agree with the Board’s alternative recommendation, and conclude that the facts of this case present “extraordinary circumstances”…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- In Re WilsonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979
- Matter of AddamsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- In Re RebackDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
- In Re KerseyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
- In Re MicheelDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- In re Stephen T.YelvertonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2014
- In Re Olekanma A. Ekekwe-KauffmanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2019
- In re AhaghotuDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2013
- In re GreenDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2016
- Cobell Ex Rel. Cobell v. JewellDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2017
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.