IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA AT RICHMOND IN THE MATTER OF SUPREME COURT RULES, PART 6, IV, PARAGRAPH RECIPROCAL DISCIPLINE PETITION
|
|
- Kelly Booker
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 VIRGINIA: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA AT RICHMOND IN THE MATTER OF SUPREME COURT RULES, PART 6, IV, PARAGRAPH RECIPROCAL DISCIPLINE PETITION TO THE HONORABLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA: The Virginia State Bar, by its president and executive director, pursuant to Part 6, IV of the Rules of this Court, requests review and approval of proposed amendments to Paragraph of Part 6, IV of the Rules of Court governing the Organization and Governance of the Virginia State Bar. The proposed amendments were unanimously approved by the Council of the Virginia State Bar on October 7, I. Revisions to subparagraph Board proceedings upon disbarment, revocation or suspension in another jurisdiction A. Overview of the issues
2 The proposed amendments result from the collaboration of the Standing Committee on Lawyer Discipline (COLD) and the Disciplinary Board to revise the procedures used to impose reciprocal discipline upon a Virginia lawyer whose law license in another jurisdiction has been suspended or revoked. The amendments provide greater specificity as to the outof-state proceedings that will result in reciprocal discipline and provide additional due process protections and fairness than the current reciprocal discipline rule. State bars throughout the country use reciprocal discipline as an efficient means of public protection when a lawyer s license has been suspended or revoked by another jurisdiction. It provides a summary procedure to impose discipline while obviating the need to relitigate matters that have already been adjudicated by another jurisdiction during proceedings where the respondent attorney was provided notice, had - 2 -
3 an opportunity to be heard, and was afforded due process. The purpose of the amendments proposed by COLD is to clarify what qualifies as another jurisdiction for reciprocal discipline purposes, to clarify the Board s authority to impose the same, equivalent, or lesser discipline as another jurisdiction, to allow for leniency as appropriate, and to remove the default provision. B. The details of the proposed amendments to Paragraph The amendments first define the disciplining authorities the VSB will rely on in imposing reciprocal discipline on a Virginia licensed attorney. It does so by defining the terms Jurisdiction and State Jurisdiction. Proposed subparagraph A defines Jurisdiction to include both other state licensing or disciplinary authorities and federal courts and agencies, including the military. This definition is in keeping with the rules and holdings of the majority of other states and with most prior Board decisions - 3 -
4 imposing reciprocal discipline. Subparagraph A.1. defining a State Jurisdiction then distinguishes a state licensing or disciplinary authority from other authorities such as federal courts or agencies. The distinction is important because orders from state licensing or disciplinary authorities are treated differently than orders from other jurisdictions in proposed subparagraph B. Proposed subparagraph B introduces the term equivalent discipline, which is intended to provide the Board with authority to impose reciprocal discipline available in Virginia when the other jurisdiction has imposed a sanction not provided for in the Virginia Rules of Court. For example, some states include as discipline an indefinite suspension, whereas in Virginia all suspensions are for a definite period. When the VSB receives notice that a lawyer s license has been suspended or revoked by another jurisdiction, it issues a Rule to Show Cause why the VSB should not likewise impose the discipline. The - 4 -
5 proposed amended rule would maintain the automatic suspension from the current rule when the other jurisdiction is a state licensing or disciplinary authority. Proposed subparagraph B, however, eliminates the automatic suspension of the respondent s law license upon issuance of the rule to show cause when the other jurisdiction is not a state licensing or disciplinary authority. This change is intended to address concerns that a suspension from another jurisdiction that is not a state licensing or disciplinary authority, such as a single judge or agency, may not warrant a suspension of the respondent s law license in Virginia, or may have been issued without the formality or due process protections that accompany suspensions from a licensing or disciplinary authority. Proposed subparagraph B also eliminates the automatic suspension of the respondent s law license upon issuance of the rule to show cause when the other jurisdiction s suspension order has been suspended or - 5 -
6 stayed. This change is intended to address fairness concerns that a respondent s law license in Virginia should not be suspended prior to the Paragraph proceeding if the respondent remains authorized to practice law in the other jurisdiction that imposed the suspension. Proposed subparagraph B. also clarifies that reciprocal discipline shall be initiated only upon a suspension or revocation from another jurisdiction imposed as a disciplinary measure. Administrative suspensions and revocations, such as those resulting from a failure to pay dues or complete required continuing legal education, shall not form the basis for reciprocal discipline. This clarification was made after a comment was received regarding the need to differentiate administrative suspensions from disciplinary suspensions and revocations. See the comment from Dan Zavadil attached. Proposed subparagraph C addresses service of the Rule to Show Cause and removes return receipt - 6 -
7 requested, as such service is not required to be effective under Part 6, Section IV, Paragraph C of the Rules of Court. Proposed subparagraph C now includes an additional ground of defense that provides that a respondent may present argument and evidence supporting the imposition of lesser discipline than was imposed in the other jurisdiction. This option is not specifically provided in the existing rule, and would allow the Board to consider the facts of a particular case when deciding on the imposition of reciprocal discipline. Proposed subparagraphs D and E address administrative matters and the minor revisions are intended to clarify the language and do not change the substance of the procedures. Proposed subparagraph F gives bar counsel the authority to present evidence and argument of the existence of one or more of the grounds against reciprocal discipline enumerated in subparagraph C. Under the existing rule, bar counsel lacks - 7 -
8 authority to present evidence and argument against the imposition of the same discipline as ordered by the other jurisdiction. Thus, if bar counsel reviews the matter and believes that reciprocal discipline may not be appropriate, bar counsel could now raise those concerns with the Board. Proposed subparagraph F also removes the automatic default provision of the existing rule, which denies the respondent the opportunity to put on a defense if the respondent has failed to submit a written response to the rule to show cause within 14 days of service. The result under the current rule is that the Board has no option but to impose the same discipline as the other jurisdiction. The proposed revision instead provides the Board with discretion to decide whether to allow the respondent to put on evidence despite the respondent s failure to file a timely written response. If after proffer the Board is willing to hear the respondent s full evidence and - 8 -
9 argument, bar counsel may move for a continuance of the hearing to investigate the respondent s defenses. Proposed subparagraph G replaces existing subparagraph F and provides that the burden of proof is clear and convincing evidence. This is not a change. This burden typically lies with the respondent, but may also lie with bar counsel if bar counsel seeks to prove the existence of one or more of the grounds found in subparagraph C. In essence, any party arguing against reciprocal discipline must meet its burden by clear and convincing evidence. Proposed subparagraph G also provides that absent clear and convincing evidence of the existence of any of the grounds specified in subparagraph C, the Board will adopt the findings of the other jurisdiction and conclude that the respondent was afforded due process. The purpose of this addition is to underscore that, absent sufficient proof to the contrary, the Board will give full faith and credit to the order of the other jurisdiction
10 Proposed subparagraph H gives the Board discretion to dismiss the case or impose lesser discipline if it finds clear and convincing proof of the existence of any of the grounds specified in subparagraph C. Under the existing rule, the respondent alone may bear the burden of proof, and if the respondent fails to prove one or more of the grounds of defense by clear and convincing evidence, the Board must impose the same discipline as the other jurisdiction. C. Concluding remarks The proposed amendments maintain the public protection goal inherent in prompt action regarding attorneys whose license has been suspended or revoked in other states, maintain efficiency and utility of a reciprocal discipline regime, while also making the reciprocal discipline system under Paragraph fairer and more able to consider and evaluate, when appropriate, the particular circumstances of a case
11 II. Publication and Comments The proposed amendments to Paragraph were approved by COLD on June 1, Notice of the proposed amendments, with a request for written comments and questions, was posted on the bar s website, and a link to the website was provided in the Virginia State Bar E-News dated July 1, Four comments were received regarding Paragraph 13-24, which are attached. Council unanimously approved the proposed amendments on October 7, III. Proposed Rule Changes 1 Revisions to subparagraph Board proceedings upon disbarment, revocation or suspension in another jurisdiction 13. PROCEDURE FOR DISCIPLINING, SUSPENDING, AND DISBARRING ATTORNEYS * * * BOARD PROCEEDINGS UPON DISBARMENT, REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION IN ANOTHER JURISDICTION A. Definitions Specific to Paragraph The following terms shall have the meaning set forth below unless the content clearly requires otherwise: 1. State Jurisdiction means any state, United States Territory, or District of 1 Additions are denoted by underlining. Deletions are noted by strikethroughs
12 Columbia law licensing or attorney disciplinary authority, including the highest court of any such jurisdiction, authorized to impose attorney discipline effective throughout the jurisdiction. 2. Jurisdiction shall refer to either a State Jurisdiction or any federal court or agency authorized to discipline attorneys, including the United States military. B.A. Initiation of Proceedings. Upon receipt of a notice from the Clerk of the Disciplinary System that another Jjurisdiction has, as a disciplinary measure, suspended or revoked the law license of an Attorney ( Respondent ) License of the Respondent or has suspended or revoked Respondent s privilege to practice law in that Jurisdiction, and that such action has become final (the Suspension or Revocation Notice ), any Board member shall enter on behalf of the Board an order of Suspension against such requiring Respondent to show cause why discipline that is the same or equivalent to the discipline imposed in the other jurisdiction should not be imposed by the Board. If the Suspension or Revocation Notice is from a State Jurisdiction and the suspension or revocation has not been suspended or stayed, then the Board s order shall suspend Respondent s License pending final disposition of the Proceeding hereunder. The Board shall serve upon such Respondent by certified mail the following: a copy of the Suspension or Revocation Notice; a copy of the Board s order; and a notice fixing the date, time and place of the hearing before the Board to determine what action should be taken in response to the Suspension or Revocation Notice and stating that the purpose of the hearing is to provide Respondent an opportunity to show cause why the same or equivalent discipline that was imposed in the other Jjurisdiction should not be imposed by the Board. Notwithstanding the above, notice of a suspension or revocation for merely administrative reasons, such as the failure to
13 pay dues or the failure to complete required continuing legal education, shall not be considered a Suspension or Revocation Notice. C.B. Opportunity for Response. Within 14 days of the date of mailing of the Board order, via certified mail, return receipt requested, to the Respondent s last address of record of the Respondent with the Bar, Respondent shall file with the Clerk of the Disciplinary System an original and six copies of any a written response and any communications or other materials, which shall be confined to allegations that argument and exhibits supporting one or more of the following grounds for dismissal or imposition of lesser discipline: 1. The record of the proceeding in the other Jjurisdiction would clearly show that such proceeding was so lacking in notice or opportunity to be heard as to constitute a denial of due process; 2. The imposition by the Board of the same or equivalent discipline upon the same proof would result in an grave injustice; or 3. The same conduct would not be grounds for disciplinary action or for the same or equivalent discipline in Virginia; or 4. The misconduct found in the other Jurisdiction would warrant the imposition of substantially lesser discipline in the Commonwealth of Virginia. D.C. Scheduling and Continuance of Hearing. Unless continued by the Board for good cause, the hearing shall be set not less than 21 nor more than 30 days after the date of the Board s order of Suspension. E.D. Provision of Copies. The Clerk of the Disciplinary System shall furnish to the Board members designated for the hearing and make available to Respondent copies of the Suspension or Revocation Notice, the Board s order of Suspension against the Respondent, the notice of hearing, any notice of
14 continuance of the hearing, and any written response or materials filed by Respondent or by Bar Counsel. F.E. Hearing Procedures. Insofar as applicable, the procedures for Proceedings on allegations of Misconduct shall govern Proceedings under this subparagraph Bar Counsel has discretion to put forth evidence and argument that one or more of the grounds specified in Paragraph C exists. If Respondent does not file a timely written response, but appears at the hearing and expresses intent to present evidence or argument supporting the existence of one or more of the grounds specified in Paragraph C, Respondent shall make a proffer to the Board. The Board may refuse to consider such evidence or argument as untimely. If the Board in its discretion is willing to consider such evidence or argument, then Bar Counsel, upon motion, may be entitled to a continuance. G.F. Burden of Proof. The Respondent shall have the burden of proof, by a clear and convincing evidentiary standard, and the burden of producing the Record upon which the Respondent relies to support the Respondent s contentions, and shall be limited at the hearing to proof of the specific contentions raised in any written response. Except to the extent the allegations of the written response are established, the findings in the other jurisdiction shall be conclusive of all matters for purposes of the Proceeding before the Board. The burden of proof to establish the existence of one or more of the grounds specified in Paragraph C is clear and convincing evidence. Unless one or more of the grounds specified in Paragraph C has been established by clear and convincing evidence, the Board shall conclude that Respondent was afforded due process by the other Jurisdiction and the findings of the other Jurisdiction shall be conclusive of all matters for purposes of the Proceeding before the Board. H.G. Action by the Board. If the Board determines that none of the grounds specified in Paragraph C exist by clear and convincing evidence, it shall impose the same or equivalent discipline as imposed in the
15 other Jurisdiction. If the Board finds by clear and convincing evidence the existence of one or more of the grounds specified in Paragraph C, the Board shall enter an order it deems appropriate. If Respondent has not filed a timely written response, or does not appear at the hearing or if the Board, after a hearing, determines that the Respondent has failed to establish the contentions of the written response by clear and convincing evidence, the Board shall impose the same discipline as was imposed in the other jurisdiction. If the Board determines that the Respondent has established such contentions by clear and convincing evidence, the Board may dismiss the proceeding or impose a lesser discipline than was imposed in the other jurisdiction. A copy of any order imposing discipline shall be served upon the Respondent via certified mail, return receipt requested. Any such order shall be final and binding, subject only to appeal as set forth in the Rules of Court provided in this Paragraph. * * * IV. Conclusion The Virginia State Bar, by its president and executive director, respectfully requests the Court to adopt the foregoing amendments to Part 6, IV, Paragraph for the reasons stated above. Respectfully submitted, VIRGINIA STATE BAR Michael W. Robinson, President
16 Karen A. Gould, Executive Director Dated this 24 th day of October,
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA AT RICHMOND IN THE MATTER OF SUPREME COURT RULES, PART 6, IV, PARAGRAPH 13 PETITION
VIRGINIA: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA AT RICHMOND IN THE MATTER OF SUPREME COURT RULES, PART 6, IV, PARAGRAPH 13 PETITION TO THE HONORABLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA:
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA AT RICHMOND IN THE MATTER OF SUPREME COURT RULES PART 6, II, RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT 5.5 AND 8.
VIRGINIA: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA AT RICHMOND IN THE MATTER OF SUPREME COURT RULES PART 6, II, RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT 5.5 AND 8.3 PETITION OF THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR Edward L. Weiner, President
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA AT RICHMOND. IN THE MATTER OF SUPREME COURT RULES, PART 6, IV, PARAGRAPH 3(e) ORGANIZATION & GOVERNMENT OF THE VSB
VIRGINIA: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA AT RICHMOND IN THE MATTER OF SUPREME COURT RULES, PART 6, IV, PARAGRAPH 3(e) ORGANIZATION & GOVERNMENT OF THE VSB PETITION TO THE HONORABLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND
More informationBEFORE THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR DISCIPLINARY BOARD ORDER OF SUSPENSION
VIRGINIA: BEFORE THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR DISCIPLINARY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF THOMAS LEROY JOHNSON, JR. VSB DOCKET NO. 04-000-3403 ORDER OF SUSPENSION On June 25, 2004, this matter came on for a hearing
More informationRULES OF SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA PART ONE A FOREIGN ATTORNEYS. Rule 1A:5. Virginia Corporate Counsel & Corporate Counsel Registrants.
RULES OF SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA PART ONE A FOREIGN ATTORNEYS Rule 1A:5. Virginia Corporate Counsel & Corporate Counsel Registrants. Introduction Notwithstanding any rule of this Court to the contrary,
More informationDISCIPLINARY PROCESS of the VIRGINIA STATE BAR
DISCIPLINARY PROCESS of the VIRGINIA STATE BAR Prepared by: Paul D. Georgiadis, Assistant Bar Counsel & Leslie T. Haley, Senior Ethics Counsel Edited and revised by Jane A. Fletcher, Deputy Intake Counsel
More informationReport of the Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee
Ohio State Bar Association Council of Delegates November 2005 Meeting 19 Report of the Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee To the Council of Delegates: The OSBA Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY : In the Matter of: : : JOEL STEINBERG, : Bar Docket No. 009-02 : Respondent. : REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL
More informationIN THE MATTER OF VSB Docket Nos HENRY A. WHITEHURST ORDER
VIRGINIA: BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR IN THE MATTER OF VSB Docket Nos. 15-000-101339 HENRY A. WHITEHURST ORDER This matter came to be heard on February 20, 2015, pursuant to
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY In the Matter of: : : JOHN O. IWEANOGE, JR., : : D.C. App. No. 06-BG-1079 Respondent. : Bar Docket No. 343-06 : A Member of the
More information[SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) ARE UNCHANGED]
(Filed - April 3, 2008 - Effective August 1, 2008) Rule XI. Disciplinary Proceedings. Section 1. Jurisdiction. [UNCHANGED] Section 2. Grounds for discipline. [SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) ARE UNCHANGED] (c)
More informationMODEL FEDERAL RULES OF DISCIPLINARY ENFORCEMENT
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION MODEL FEDERAL RULES OF DISCIPLINARY ENFORCEMENT Developed by Standing Committee on Professional Discipline and Center for Professional Discipline February 14, 1978 Model Federal
More informationAMEMDMENTS TO COMMENTS 5 AND 13 OF RULE 5.5 PROPOSED BY VIRGINIA STATE BAR S MULTIJURISDICTIONAL PRACTICE TASK FORCE ON MAY 21, 2013
AMEMDMENTS TO COMMENTS 5 AND 13 OF RULE 5.5 PROPOSED BY VIRGINIA STATE BAR S MULTIJURISDICTIONAL PRACTICE TASK FORCE ON MAY 21, 2013 Rule 5.5. Unauthorized Practice Of Law; Multijurisdictional Practice
More informationTuesday 28th November, 2006.
Tuesday 28th November, 2006. On November 10, 2005 came the Virginia State Bar, by Phillip V. Anderson, its President, and Thomas A. Edmonds, its Executive Director and Chief Operating Officer, and presented
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE ORDER
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE ORDER Pursuant to Part II, Article 73-a of the New Hampshire Constitution and Supreme Court Rule 51, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire adopts
More informationVIRGINIA: BEFORE THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR DISCIPLINARY BOARD. IN THE MATTER OF VSB Docket No SAM GARRISON ORDER OF REVOCATION
VIRGINIA: BEFORE THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR DISCIPLINARY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF VSB Docket No. 02-080-3027 SAM GARRISON ORDER OF REVOCATION On April 23, 2004 this matter came on for hearing upon certification
More information1. Admission to the Bar. A lawyer is qualified for admission to the bar of the district if the lawyer meets the following requirements:
LR 83 LAWYERS a. Roll of Lawyers. The bar of each court consists of counsel admitted to practice before the court who have taken the oath or affirmation prescribed by the rules in force when they were
More informationeihj oj, 9lid'urumd on.m.tmdtuj tiie 16 t1t day oj, Up'til, 2018.
VIRGINIA: 9n tiie SUP'lmre &wd oj, VVtginia field at tiie SUP'lmre &wd fljuildi.ng in tiie eihj oj, 9lid'urumd on.m.tmdtuj tiie 16 t1t day oj, Up'til, 2018. It is ordered that the Rules for Integration
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY In the Matter of: ) ) JOHN C. HARDWICK, JR., ) Bar Docket No. 370-01 ) Respondent. ) REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD ON
More informationRules for Qualified & Court-Appointed Parenting Coordinators
Part I. STANDARDS Rules 15.000 15.200 Part II. DISCIPLINE Rule 15.210. Procedure [No Change] Any complaint alleging violations of the Florida Rules For Qualified And Court-Appointed Parenting Coordinators,
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY In the Matter of: ) ) MICHAEL C. MEISLER, ) Bar Docket No. 414-98 ) Respondent. ) REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY In the Matter of: ) ) TODD A. SHEIN, ) Bar Docket No. 453-02 ) Respondent. ) REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL
More informationKENNETH HARRISON FAILS, II OPINION BY v. Record No CHIEF JUSTICE HARRY L. CARRICO January 10, 2003 VIRGINIA STATE BAR
Present: All the Justices KENNETH HARRISON FAILS, II OPINION BY v. Record No. 021851 CHIEF JUSTICE HARRY L. CARRICO January 10, 2003 VIRGINIA STATE BAR FROM THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR DISCIPLINARY BOARD This
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY : : : : : : : : : :
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY In the Matter of Respondent. RICHARD G. CERVIZZI, A Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals (Bar Registration
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY In the Matter of: : : BURMAN A. BERGER, : : D.C. App. No. 05-BG-1054 Respondent. : Bar Docket Nos. 326-05 & 278-04 : A Member
More informationRules 1.9, 1.9A (New Rule), and 2.1 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i
RE: Rules 1.9, 1.9A (New Rule), and 2.1 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i CHANGES TO PRO HAC VICE PRACTICE AND DUTIES The Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i seeks public comment
More informationMonday 2nd August, 2004
Monday 2nd August, 2004 On March 5, 2004 came the Virginia State Bar, by Jeannie P. Dahnk, its President, and Thomas A. Edmonds, its Executive Director and Chief Operating Officer, and presented to the
More informationPeople v. Crews, 05PDJ049. March 6, Attorney Regulation. Following a sanctions hearing, the Presiding Disciplinary Judge disbarred Respondent
People v. Crews, 05PDJ049. March 6, 2006. Attorney Regulation. Following a sanctions hearing, the Presiding Disciplinary Judge disbarred Respondent Richard A. Crews (Attorney Registration No. 32472) from
More informationPeople v. Michael Scott Collins. 14PDJ042. December 2, 2014.
People v. Michael Scott Collins. 14PDJ042. December 2, 2014. Following a sanctions hearing, the Presiding Disciplinary Judge suspended Michael Scott Collins (Attorney Registration Number 27234) for three
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY In the Matter of: ) ) BRADFORD J. BARNEYS, ) ) Bar Docket No. 34-99 Respondent. ) REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL
More informationPART ONE A FOREIGN ATTORNEYS. Rule la:l. Admission to Practice in This Commonwealth Without Examination.
VIRGINIA: {ffwyo/~o/n Friday 1st cky 0/ November, 2013. It is ordered that the Rules heretofore adopted and promulgated by this Court and now in effect be and they hereby are amended to become effective
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. Nos. 07-BG-254 and 07-BG Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals (Bar No.
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections
More informationCASE NO. CL JAMES DANIEL GRIFFITH VSB DOCKET NOS.:
12/27/2018 09:56 (FAX) P.002/003 VIRGINIA: BEFORE THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF FAIRFAX IN THE MATTERS OF CASE NO. CL2018-15409 JAMES DANIEL GRIFFITH VSB DOCKET NOS.: 18-070-110110 18-070-110600
More informationdisciplinary actions
Disciplinary Actions The following is a list of attorneys who have been publicly disciplined. The orders have been edited. Administrative language has been removed to make the opinions more readable. Respondent
More informationamendments shall become effective on January 1, 1998, at 12:01 a.m. It is so ordered.
Supreme Court of Florida AMENDMENTS TO THE RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR -- CHAPTERS 6 AND 16. No. 91,405 [December 18, 1997] PER CURIAM. The Florida Bar ("the Bar") petitions this Court to amend chapters
More informationSUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA. Atlanta June 11, The Honorable Supreme Court met pursuant to adjournment. The following order was passed:
SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA Atlanta June 11, 2015 The Honorable Supreme Court met pursuant to adjournment. The following order was passed: It is ordered that new Uniform Magistrate Court Rule 7.5 (relating
More informationMinnesota Society of Certified Public Accountants Bylaws as adopted by membership with February 2018 amendments
Minnesota Society of Certified Public Accountants Bylaws as adopted by membership with February 2018 amendments ARTICLE I MEMBERSHIP Section 1. CPA Members a) Eligibility for Membership. Subject to the
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY In the Matter of: : : ROBERT M. SILVERMAN : Bar Docket No. 145-02 D.C. Bar No. 162610, : : Respondent. : ORDER OF THE BOARD ON
More informationDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals Board on Professional Responsibility. Board Rules
District of Columbia Court of Appeals Board on Professional Responsibility Board Rules Adopted June 23, 1983 Effective July 1, 1983 This edition represents a complete revision of the Board Rules. All previous
More informationPeople v. Ringler. 12PDJ087. June 21, Attorney Regulation. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge disbarred Victoria Lynne Ringler (Attorney
People v. Ringler. 12PDJ087. June 21, 2013. Attorney Regulation. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge disbarred Victoria Lynne Ringler (Attorney Registration Number 30727), effective July 26, 2013. Ringler
More information47064 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 171 / Thursday, September 3, 1998 / Notices
47064 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 171 / Thursday, September 3, 1998 / Notices Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
More informationNASD Notice to Members Executive Summary
INFORMATIONAL Code Of Procedure SEC Approves Changes To Rule Regarding The Code Of Procedure SUGGESTED ROUTING The Suggested Routing function is meant to aid the reader of this document. Each NASD member
More informationOPINION AND ORDER IMPOSING SANCTIONS. Sanction Imposed: Two Year and Three Month Suspension
People v. Chastain, No. GC98A53 (consolidated with No. GC98A59). The Presiding Disciplinary Judge and Hearing Board imposed a two-year and threemonth suspension in this reciprocal discipline action arising
More informationThe Anatomy of a Complaint
The Anatomy of a Complaint Stanton A. Hazlett, Disciplinary Administrator The Kansas Disciplinary Administrator s Office Return to Green 2016 Friday, April 22, 2016 9:30 am - 4:00 pm Stinson Leonard Street
More informationProfessional Engineers Act Amended
Professional Engineers Act Amended On December 14, 2017, the Stronger, Fairer Ontario Act (Bill 177) passed third reading in the legislature and received Royal Assent from the lieutenant governor. Schedule
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. No. 05-BG Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals (Bar No.
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY In the Matter of: : : RONALD ALLEN BROWN, : : Respondent. : D.C. App. No. 07-BG-81 : Bar Docket No. 476-06 : A Member of the Bar
More informationSUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN
2002 WI 32 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 02-0123-D COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Dianna L. Brooks, Attorney at Law: Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant,
More informationFlorida Rules for Certified and Court-Appointed Mediators. Part I. Mediator Qualifications
Florida Rules for Certified and Court-Appointed Mediators Part I. Mediator Qualifications Rule 10.100. General Qualifications Certification Requirements (a) General. For certification as a county court,
More informationThe court will accept comment on the proposed rule changes until 5 p.m. Monday, August 17, Comment may be made to
The Kansas Supreme Court is considering proposed changes to Rules 708, 709A, and 712 to allow new attorneys to take their oaths following one procedure, regardless of whether they are admitted under Rule
More informationPeople v. Allyn. 10PDJ068. February 7, Attorney Regulation. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge disbarred Glenn B. Allyn (Attorney Registration
People v. Allyn. 10PDJ068. February 7, 2011. Attorney Regulation. The Presiding Disciplinary Judge disbarred Glenn B. Allyn (Attorney Registration No. 25428), effective March 10, 2011. Allyn was disbarred
More informationLAWYERING FOR A LAWYER WITH A DISABILITY BEFORE THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS
LAWYERING FOR A LAWYER WITH A DISABILITY BEFORE THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS By: José R. Guerrero, Jr., Esq. and Bob Bennett The Bennett Law Firm 515 Louisiana, Suite 200 Houston, Texas 77002 T: (713) 225-6000
More informationJOINT ETHICS ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (JEEP) MANUAL OF PROCEDURES. December 2006
JOINT ETHICS ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (JEEP) MANUAL OF PROCEDURES December 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: ETHICS ENFORCEMENT... 1 JOINT ETHICS ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (JEEP)... 2 THIS MANUAL... 3 DEFINITIONS...
More information: No. 852 Disciplinary Docket No. 3. : Nos. 148 DB 2003 & 174 DB : Attorney Registration No : (Allegheny County) ORDER
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA In the Matter of : No. 852 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 JOSEPH E. HUDAK : Nos. 148 DB 2003 & 174 DB 2003 : Attorney Registration No. 45882 PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT :
More informationIndiana Rules of Court Rules for Admission to the Bar and the Discipline of Attorneys
Indiana Rules of Court Rules for Admission to the Bar and the Discipline of Attorneys Rule 5. Foreign Legal Consultants (1) General Regulation as to Licensing. In its discretion, the Supreme Court may
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY In the Matter of: ) ) STEVEN E. MIRSKY, ) Bar Docket No. 342-02 ) Respondent. ) REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL
More informationALABAMA STATE PERSONNEL BOARD ALABAMA STATE PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
ALABAMA STATE PERSONNEL BOARD ALABAMA STATE PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATIVE CODE CHAPTER 670-X-5 STATE PERSONNEL BOARD: MEETINGS, MINUTES AND HEARING PROCEDURE TABLE OF CONTENTS 670-X-5-.01 670-X-5-.02
More informationOFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA
OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA PROCEDURES FOR COMPLAINTS AGAINST CERTIFIED MEDIATORS, MEDIATION TRAINERS, AND MEDIATOR MENTORS 1. GENERAL Adopted by the Judicial Council
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY In the Matter of: : : ANTOINE I. MANN, ESQUIRE, : : DCCA No. 03-BG-1138 Respondent. : Bar Docket No. 200-00 : A Member of the
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO Disciplinary Counsel, Relator, CASE NO. 2012-1107 vs. Joel David Joseph Respondent. RELATOR'S REPLY TO RESPONDENT'S RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Jonathan E.
More informationCHAPTER 16. FOREIGN LEGAL CONSULTANCY RULE RULE PURPOSE RULE GENERAL CERTIFICATION REGULATIONS
CHAPTER 16. FOREIGN LEGAL CONSULTANCY RULE RULE 16-1.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this chapter is to permit a person who is admitted to practice in a foreign country as an attorney, counselor at law, or the
More informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA John J. Klinger : : v. : No. 131 C.D. 2004 : Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, : Submitted: June 25, 2004 Department of Transportation, : Bureau of Driver Licensing,
More information10 A BILL to amend and reenact , , , , , , , , ,
1 H. B./ S. B. 2 3 (By Delegates/ Senators) 4 [] 5 [February, 2009] 6 7 8 9 10 A BILL to amend and reenact 30-19-1, 30-19-2, 30-19-3, 11 30-19-4, 30-19-5, 30-19-6, 30-19-7, 30-19-8, 30-19-9, 12 30-19-10
More informationBEFORE THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR DISCIPLINARY BOARD. IN THE MATTER OF VSB Docket No Martin F. McMahon AMENDED ORDER OF SUSPENSION
V I R G I N I A: BEFORE THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR DISCIPLINARY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF VSB Docket No. 17-053-108449 Martin F. McMahon AMENDED ORDER OF SUSPENSION This Matter came to be heard on October 26,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 114,097. In the Matter of TIMOTHY CLARK MEYER, Respondent. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN DISCIPLINE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS No. 114,097 In the Matter of TIMOTHY CLARK MEYER, Respondent. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN DISCIPLINE Original proceeding in discipline. Opinion filed December 18,
More informationCHAPTER 20 RULE DISCIPLINE AND DISABILITY: POLICY JURISDICTION
PROPOSED CHANGES TO COLORADO RULES OF PROCEDURE REGARDING ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE AND DISABILITY PROCEEDINGS, COLORADO ATTORNEYS FUND FOR CLIENT PROTECTION, AND COLORADO RULE OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT 1.15 The
More informationVIRGINIA: BEFORE THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR DISCIPLINARY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF SHELLY RENEE COLLETTE VSB DOCKET NO.: ORDER OF SUSPENSION
VIRGINIA: BEFORE THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR DISCIPLINARY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF SHELLY RENEE COLLETTE VSB DOCKET NO.: 18-000-111181 ORDER OF SUSPENSION THIS MATTER came on to be heard on February 16, 2018,
More informationCHAPTER 17. AUTHORIZED HOUSE COUNSEL RULE GENERALLY RULE PURPOSE RULE DEFINITIONS
CHAPTER 17. AUTHORIZED HOUSE COUNSEL RULE 17-1. GENERALLY RULE 17-1.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this chapter is to facilitate the relocation of persons employed by or to be employed by any business organization,
More informationNBPA Regulations Governing Player Agents
NBPA Regulations Governing Player Agents As Amended June, 1991 FOREWARD This booklet is designed to provide you with pertinent information concerning the effective player agent regulation system developed
More informationBEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR. VSB Docket No , , , ORDER OF REVOCATION
VIRGINIA; BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR IN THE MATTER OF BRYAN JAMES WALDRON VSB Docket No. 17-051-106968, 18-051-109817, 18-051-111305, 18-051-111321 ORDER OF REVOCATION THIS
More informationRule 1A:8. Military Spouse Provisional Admission.
RULES OF SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA PART ONE A FOREIGN ATTORNEYS Rule 1A:8. Military Spouse Provisional Admission. 1. Requirements. A person who meets all requirements of subparagraphs (a) through (m) of
More informationCSO s Operating Protocol
CSO s Operating Protocol Part I: General Provisions 1 Title These protocols shall be known as the Committee on Student Organizations Operating Protocol" and may be cited individually by specific Protocol
More informationBEFORE THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR DISCIPLINARY BOARD BRENT LAVELLE BARBOUR VSB DOCKET NO.: ORDER OF REVOCATION
V I R G I N I A: BEFORE THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR DISCIPLINARY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF BRENT LAVELLE BARBOUR VSB DOCKET NO.: 16-102-106014 ORDER OF REVOCATION This matter came on to be heard on February 16,
More informationTHE NEW GRIEVANCE SYSTEM AND HOW TO AVOID IT. BETTY BLACKWELL Chair, Commission for Lawyer Discipline Standing Committee of The State Bar
THE NEW GRIEVANCE SYSTEM AND HOW TO AVOID IT BETTY BLACKWELL Chair, Commission for Lawyer Discipline Standing Committee of The State Bar Attorney at Law Board Certified Criminal Law 1306 Nueces St. Austin,
More informationBEFORE THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR DISCIPLINARY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF VSB DOCKET: ELLIOT M. SCHLOSSER ORDER
BEFORE THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR DISCIPLINARY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF VSB DOCKET: 01-010-1990 ELLIOT M. SCHLOSSER ORDER This matter came before a duly constituted Panel of the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
Not for Publication. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS IN THE MATTER OF THE MOTION TO PERMIT AND AUTHORIZE MICHAEL MOTYLINSKI, ESQUIRE AS AN ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL TO APPEAR IN THE SUPREME
More informationRule Change #2000(20)
Rule Change #2000(20) The Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure Chapter 20. Colorado Rules of Procedure Regarding Attorney Discipline and Disability Proceedings, Colorado Attorneys Fund for Client Protection,
More informationmail to respondent s last known office address in Camden, New Jersey. The returned
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY Disciplinary Review Board Docket No. DgB 01-014 IN THE MATTER OF AARON SMITH AN ATTORNEY AT LAW Decision Default [R. 1:20-4(f)] Decided: October 9, 2001 To the Honorable Chief
More informationSAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY
THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. : 14 DIVISION: Taxis and Accessible Services BRIEF DESCRIPTION: SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY Requesting that the Board of Directors amend Transportation
More informationCOMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE PROCESS
COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE PROCESS Approved by CPHR SASKATCHEWAN Board as of September 18, 2009 Updated COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE PROCESS I Introduction 2 II Definitions 2 III Establishment of CPHR SASKATCHEWAN
More informationRULE 140. CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGES AND PITTSBURGH MAGISTRATES COURT JUDGES[, AND PHILADELPHIA TRAFFIC COURT JUDGES].
RULE 140. CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGES AND PITTSBURGH MAGISTRATES COURT JUDGES[, AND PHILADELPHIA TRAFFIC COURT JUDGES]. (A) CONTEMPT IN THE PRESENCE OF THE COURT [1.] (1) An
More informationS17Y1329. IN THE MATTER OF RICKY W. MORRIS, JR. seeking the disbarment of Ricky W. Morris, Jr. (State Bar No ), based
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: January 29, 2018 S17Y1329. IN THE MATTER OF RICKY W. MORRIS, JR. PER CURIAM. This disciplinary matter is before the Court on a Notice of Discipline seeking the
More informationRules of Procedure TABLE OF CONTENTS
OSB Rules of Procedure (Revised 1/1/2018) 1 Rules of Procedure (As approved by the Supreme Court by order dated February 9, 1984 and as amended by Supreme Court orders dated April 18, 1984, May 31, 1984,
More informationARTICLE 5.--ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT GENERAL PROVISIONS. K.S.A through shall be known and may be cited as the Kansas
ARTICLE.--ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT GENERAL PROVISIONS December, 00-0. Title. K.S.A. -0 through - - shall be known and may be cited as the Kansas administrative procedure act. History: L., ch., ; July,.
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBLITY
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY In the Matter of: : : MICHAEL D. ROSTOKER, : : Bar Docket No. 397-04 Respondent. : D.C. App. No. 04-BG-1388 : A Member of the
More informationThe Urban Municipal Administrators Act
1 URBAN MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATORS c. U-8.1 The Urban Municipal Administrators Act being Chapter U-8.1 of the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1980-81 (effective May 19, 1981) as amended by the Statutes of Saskatchewan,
More informationRULE VIII ADMISSION OF FOREIGN ATTORNEYS AS AUTHORIZED HOUSE COUNSEL
RULE VIII ADMISSION OF FOREIGN ATTORNEYS AS AUTHORIZED HOUSE COUNSEL A. Purpose. This rule is intended to facilitate the relocation of persons employed by or to be employed by any business organization,
More informationENFORCEMENT RULES & DISCIPLINARY BOARD RULES RELATING TO REINSTATEMENT
ENFORCEMENT RULES & DISCIPLINARY BOARD RULES RELATING TO REINSTATEMENT PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF DISCIPLINARY ENFORCEMENT (Contains Amendments Through July 14, 2011) Rule 218. Reinstatement. (a) An attorney
More informationLOUISIANA ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY BOARD IN RE: JOSE W. VEGA RECOMMENDATION TO THE LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT INTRODUCTION
LOUISIANA ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY BOARD IN RE: JOSE W. VEGA NUMBER: 16-DB-093 16-DB-093 2/8/2018 RECOMMENDATION TO THE LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT INTRODUCTION This attorney discipline matter arises out of formal
More informationRichard J. Engelhardt appeared on behalf of the Office of Attorney Ethics. To the Honorable Chief Justice and Associate Justices of
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY Disciplinary Review Board Docket No. DRB 07-079 District Docket No. XIV-06-0605E IN THE MATTER OF RAMON SARMIENTO AN ATTORNEY AT LAW Decision Argued: July 19, 2007 Decided:
More informationStanding Practice Order Pursuant to 20.1 of Act Establishing Rules Governing Practice and Procedure in Medical Assistance Provider Appeals
Standing Practice Order Pursuant to 20.1 of Act 2002-142 Establishing Rules Governing Practice and Procedure in Medical Assistance Provider Appeals TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I--PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS Subpart
More informationPeople v. David William Beale. 16PDJ066. February 9, 2017.
People v. David William Beale. 16PDJ066. February 9, 2017. After a sanctions hearing, the Presiding Disciplinary Judge disbarred David William Beale (attorney registration number 19097) from the practice
More informationBef ore the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board. Commonwealth. By tendering her Consent to Revocation at a time when allegations of
VIRGINIA: Bef ore the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board Jn the Matter of Che1yl D. Footman-Banks Attorney at Law VSB Docket Nos.16-022-104335 and 16-022-104602 On March 9, 2017, came Cheryl D. Footman-Banks
More informationSupreme Court of Florida
Supreme Court of Florida No. SC87538 PER CURIAM. THE FLORIDA BAR, Complainant, vs. LIJYASU MAHOMET KANDEKORE, Respondent. [June 1, 2000] We have for review the report of the referee recommending that disciplinary
More informationAPPENDIX A Affidavit in Support of Application to Resign While Proceeding or Investigation is Pending INSTRUCTIONS An application pursuant to section
APPENDIX A Affidavit in Support of Application to Resign While Proceeding or Investigation is Pending INSTRUCTIONS An application pursuant to section 1240.10 of these Rules to resign as an attorney and
More informationRecommendations of the Disciplinary Board dated July 29, 2011, it is hereby
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, : No. 1759 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 Petitioner. : No. 78 DB 2010 V. : Attorney Registration No. 58783 MARK D. LANCASTER, Respondent
More informationLOUISIANA SUPREME COURT RULE XVII ADMISSION TO THE BAR OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANA
Section 13. Pro Hac Vice Admission LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT RULE XVII ADMISSION TO THE BAR OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANA A. Admission in Pending Litigation Before a Court or Agency (1) Definitions (i) An out-of-state
More informationGa Comp. R. & Regs Legal Authority. Ga Comp. R. & Regs Title and Purposes.
Ga Comp. R. & Regs. 290-1-6-.01 290-1-6-.01. Legal Authority. These rules are adopted and published pursuant to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated (O.C.G.A.) Sections 31-2-6; 31-7-1, 31-13-1, 31-22-1,
More informationLED. the right to request a proceeding in accordance with sections and , Florida. Docketed by
LED JUN 19 2018 Docketed by CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER JIMMY PATRON IS STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, Petitioner, Case No.: 211297-17 -AG v. CHRISTOPHER MARTIN, Respondent. ORDER OF REVOCATION
More informationUNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE TRADEMARK MANUAL OF EXAMINING PROCEDURE (TMEP) Chapter 600 Attorney, Representative, and Signature
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE TRADEMARK MANUAL OF EXAMINING PROCEDURE (TMEP) Chapter 600 Attorney, Representative, and Signature April 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS 601 Owner of Mark May Be Represented
More information