Opinion

In re Brown

  • 649 A.2d 835
  • 1994 D.C. App. LEXIS 214
  • 1994 WL 659472
Court
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Filed
Nov 21, 1994
Status
Published
On the bench
Farrell, Newman, Schwelb
Cited by
3 cases
Authority
More cited than 66.5%

completion of CLE classes and six months of practice monitoring for any private practice

How later courts described this case

  • completion of CLE classes and six months of practice monitoring for any private practice
  • practice monitoring and CLE

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner, an attorney, consented to his disbarment in the District of Columbia in August 1981 after being charged with disciplinary violations for alleged mishandling of funds in three probate matters. We previously denied a petition for reinstatement which he filed in 1987. In re Brown, 617 A.2d 194 (D.C.1992). We now accept the recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility and a Hearing Committee that petitioner be reinstated to the Bar of the District of Columbia on two conditions. * See In re Roundtree, 503 A.2d 1215, 1217 (D.C.1985) (summarizing criteria for reinstatement). One of those conditions has been satisfied: petitioner has certified to his completion of Continuing Legal Education courses and (more recently) two courses on *836 professional responsibility under the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct. As the second condition, the Board recommended that if and when petitioner engages in the private practice of law (his declared intention was to accept an administrative agency position), his practice should be monitored for a period of six months starting with the resumption of private practice. In view of the length of time petitioner has been disbarred, we accept this recommendation too as appropriate.

Therefore, the petition for reinstatement is granted, on the condition that petitioner shall notify the Board at least one month before engaging in the private practice of law of his intention to do so. Upon such notification, the Board shall appoint a member of the District of Columbia Bar to monitor petitioner’s practice for a period of six months. This monitoring shall not be required if petitioner is employed by a government agency.

So ordered.

Bar Counsel proposed these conditions to the Hearing Committee, but otherwise did not oppose the petition for reinstatement.

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.