Attorney Grievance Commission v. Dobrydnio

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Dobrydnio

791 A.2d 941, 368 Md. 42, 2002 Md. LEXIS 234

CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland

DecidedFebruary 22, 2002

DocketMisc. AG No. 27

StatusPublished

This text of 791 A.2d 941 (Attorney Grievance Commission v. Dobrydnio) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Maryland primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Dobrydnio, 791 A.2d 941, 368 Md. 42, 2002 Md. LEXIS 234 (Md. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

This matter came before the Court on the Joint Petition for Public Reprimand by Consent submitted by the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland, Petitioner, and Philip S. Dobrydnio, Respondent. The Court having considered the Petition, it is this 22nd day of February, 2002,

ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland that the Respondent, Philip S. Dobrydnio, be, and he hereby is, reprimanded for his violation of Rules 1.3, 1.4 and 8.1(b) of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct by his failure to act diligently and to communicate adequately with his client in connection with his representation of Warren A. Hemphill, Sr. in a domestic relations case and by his failure to respond to Bar Counsel’s inquiries in this matter.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

This matter came before the Court on the Joint Petition for Public Reprimand by Consent submitted by the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland, Petitioner, and Philip S. Dobrydnio, Respondent. The Court having considered the Petition, it is this 22nd day of February, 2002,

ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland that the Respondent, Philip S. Dobrydnio, be, and he hereby is, reprimanded for his violation of Rules 1.3, 1.4 and 8.1(b) of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct by his failure to act diligently and to communicate adequately with his client in connection with his representation of Warren A. Hemphill, Sr. in a domestic relations case and by his failure to respond to Bar Counsel’s inquiries in this matter.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

791 A.2d 941, 368 Md. 42, 2002 Md. LEXIS 234, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/attorney-grievance-commission-v-dobrydnio-md-2002.