Legal Opinion
In re Washington
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided May 4, 1988No. 85-902PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM;
Before us is a recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility that respondent be suspended for three years. We think this sanction insufficient. The record shows a persistent pattern of violation of the most basic requirements of the attorney-client relationship. No responsibility of our attorney disciplinary system is more fundamental than protecting the public against such actions. Although disbarment could well be an appropriate sanction for such numerous derelictions, we impose on the facts of this case a four-year suspension.1
As the attached Board Report and…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In Re RebackDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
- In Re HutchinsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
- Matter of HauptDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
- United States v. EspinosaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1985
- Matter of KerrDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- In Re EvansDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006
- Matter of RobertsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- In Re DelateDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- In Re TinsleyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- In re WrightDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.