Opinion

In Re Page

  • 956 A.2d 683
  • 2008 D.C. App. LEXIS 388
  • 2008 WL 4155671
Court
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Filed
Sep 11, 2008
Status
Published
On the bench
Fisher, Pryor, King
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 20.0%

The opinion

*684

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On further consideration of the certified copy of the order from the Court of Appeals of Maryland suspending respondent by consent,

see Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Md. v. Page,

402 Md. 688 , 939 A.2d 116 (2008), this court’s February 13, 2008, order that suspended respondent from the practice of law pending further action of the court, the July 17, 2008, Report and Recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility that recommended the suspension of respondent for 30 days as identical reciprocal discipline to his consented to Maryland suspension, there appearing to be no oppositions to the recommendation and it further appearing that respondent has failed to file the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

ORDERED that Alfred A. Page is hereby suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for 30 days; however, for purposes of reinstatement, this period will not commence to run, until such time as respondent files an affidavit that fully complies with the requirements of D.C.Bar. R. XI, § 14(g).

See In re Cater,

887 A.2d 1 (D.C.2005) (failure to respond to inquiries of Bar Counsel constitutes misconduct in the District of Columbia) and

In re Sumner,

762 A.2d 528 (D.C.2000) (in uncontested reciprocal discipline cases, absent a finding of grave injustice, this court will impose identical reciprocal discipline).

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.