Wednesday, September 9, 2009

No Buyers Remorse

The Maryland Court of Appeals reinstated an attorney from suspension in 2007. The reinstatement was immediately challenged by a member of the Maryland Bar based on allegations made against the attorney in a federal civil matter. The attorney had disclosed the litigation in the reinstatement petition. The court dismissed the motion but reconsidered the issue on motion from Bar Counsel. The court today dismissed Bar Counsel's motion, concluding that the disclosure by the attorney of the pending litigation was sufficient. Subsequent findings in the civil matter did not form a basis to undo the reinstatement.

A concurring opinion notes that Bar Counsel is free to initiate new charges if it chooses to do so: "...although Bar Counsel may not have persuaded the Court to vacate [the attorney's] reinstatement...Bar Counsel is not foreclosed from initiating a new investigation and disciplinary action (if appropriate) as to alleged misconduct (if any) by the [attorney] relating to the transactions involving [the opposing party in the federal case] occuring after the date of the Court's 11 April 2007 order of reinstatement." (Mike Frisch)

Bar Discipline & Process | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference No Buyers Remorse:


Post a comment