Legal Opinion
In Re Dietz
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided January 30, 1995No. 93-BG-1272PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Per curiam
This reciprocal discipline case comes to us from the Board on Professional Responsibility (“the Board”), which recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for thirty days after having been publicly reprimanded in Maryland for violating its disciplinary rules. The Board recommended a more severe sanction in light of respondent’s similar pattern of neglect in the District of Columbia. We agree with the Board’s recommendation and suspend respondent from the practice of law for thirty days.
I
On August 25, 1993, the Court of Appeals of Maryland publicly reprimanded respondent…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In Re GarnerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- Matter of DoryDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
- In Re OntellDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1991
- In Re FowlerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
- In Re DietzDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- In Re SheridanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002
- In Re HitselbergerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2000
- In Re DietzDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- In Re DruryDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- In Re SteinbergDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.