Legal Opinion
In Re Freed
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided June 7, 2001No. 00-BG-123, 00-BG-1577PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Per curiam
Respondent Robert C. Freed is the subject of two disciplinary actions. The first stems from his failure to respond to Bar Counsel’s inquiries about an ethical complaint, and his failure to comply with an order of the Board on Professional Responsibility (“the Board”) directing him to respond to the complaint. In accord with the Hearing Committee, the Board found that respondent violated Rule 8.4(d) of the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct and D.C. Bar R. XI, § 2(b)(3).
The second action is a reciprocal matter. One of respondent’s clients wrote to a judge of the United States…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- In Re GoldsboroughDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995
- In Re DelaneyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
- In Re GilesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1999
- In Re BergDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re SpikesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- In Re BellerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004
- In Re ChasnoffDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003