Legal Opinion
In Re Vohra
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided November 22, 2000No. 00-BG-395PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Per curiam
The Board on Professional Responsibility (“Board”) found that respondent, Robert N. Vohra, violated the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct by failing to complete certain tasks that he had promised a client, misrepresenting to that client that work had been completed when it had not, and allowing his law firm to seek reimbursement for fees that had not been incurred. In mitigation, the Board found that respondent had been suffering from a major depression at the time of these events, but has improved with treatment and now has a successful practice. The Board has recommended…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- In Re DelaneyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
- In Re DunietzDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
3Cited by10 opinions
- In Re EdwardsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- In re VohraDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2013
- In Re SoininenDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
- In re VohraAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- In re BoykinsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2010
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.