Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Sinclair

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided February 26, 1986No. Misc. Docket (Subtitle BV) No. 20, September Term, 1985PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SMITH, Judge.

In this case we shall disbar an attorney whose neglect resulted in a default judgment in the amount of $100,000 being entered against his client.

Bar Counsel, acting pursuant to the provisions of Maryland Rule BY9, on behalf of the Attorney Grievance Commission, filed a petition with us seeking disciplinary action against John Howell Sinclair, a member of the Bar of this Court since July 7, 1969. The petition alleged violation of Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(1), (4), (5) and (6); 6-101(A)(2) and (3); and 7-101(A)(l), (2) and (3).

Pursuant to Rule BV9 b we referred the matter for…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Maryland State Bar Ass'n v. PhoebusCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SinclairCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1984
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SinclairCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. WallaceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  2. ATTORNEY GRIEV. COMM'N OF MARYLAND v. ManningCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API