Legal Opinion
In Re Lee
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided March 5, 1998No. 97-BG-243PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Per curiam
Petitioner, an attorney who was disbarred by statutory mandate for commission of crimes of moral turpitude, D.C.Code § 11-2503(a) (1995), seeks reinstatement pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, § 16. 1 Both the hearing committee assigned to his petition and the Board on Professional Responsibility unanimously recommend that his petition be denied.
“The burden of proof in a reinstatement case is on the petitioner to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he or she is fit to resume the practice of law.” In re Robinson, 705 A.2d 687, 689 (D.C.1998)' (internal quotation omitted). Furthermore,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In Re RoundtreeDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1985
- In Re MicheelDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- In Re McBrideDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- In Re RayDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- In Re BordersDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- In Re SlaughterDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
- In Re ReynoldsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- In Re RoxboroughDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
- In re TurnerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006
- In re StantonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.