Legal Opinion

ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COM'N OF MARYLAND v. Harper & Kemp

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided September 15, 1999No. Misc. AG No. 1, Sept. Term, 1998PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RODOWSKY, Judge.

The principal charges in these jointly tried attorney discipline cases allege violations of Rule 5.5 (Unauthorized practice of law) of the Maryland Lawyers’ Rules of Professional Conduct. 1 The violations concern a law office that operated in Baltimore City under the firm name, “Harper & Kemp,” from May 1995 until sometime in 1997.

One of the respondents, T. Clarence Harper (Harper), is an attorney who is licensed to practice in the District of Columbia. Throughout the relevant period Harper maintained an office on Georgia Avenue in the District of Columbia. His practice…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. KempCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. BrennanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1998
  3. ATTORNEY GRIEV. COMM'N OF MARYLAND v. KolodnerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1991
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GreensteinCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. AwuahCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
  2. Attorney Grievance Com'n of Maryland v. Harris-SmithCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. BarneysCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  4. Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. LangCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2018
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. ObiCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API