Attorney Grievance Commission v. Osborne

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Osborne

716 A.2d 1029, 351 Md. 132, 1998 Md. LEXIS 1074

CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland

DecidedSeptember 3, 1998

DocketMisc. Docket AG, No. 54

StatusPublished

This text of 716 A.2d 1029 (Attorney Grievance Commission v. Osborne) 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. Osborne, 716 A.2d 1029, 351 Md. 132, 1998 Md. LEXIS 1074 (Md. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

This matter came before the Court on the Joint Petition for Reprimand by Consent submitted by the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland, Petitioner, and Woodley B. Osborne, Respondent. The Court having considered the petition, it is this 3rd day of September, 1998,

ORDERED by the Court of Appeals of Maryland that the Respondent, Woodley B. Osborne, be, and he hereby is, reprimanded for misconduct in violation of Rules 1.15(a) and 5.3(c)(2) of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct; and it is further

ORDERED that the Respondent shall complete a continuing legal education course in professional responsibility, approved in advance by the District of Columbia’s Bar Counsel, and that the Respondent shall certify his completion of such a course to this Court, with a copy to Maryland’s Bar Counsel, within six months from the date of an Opinion and Order by which the District of Columbia Court of Appeals disciplined the Respondent for the same misconduct set forth herein.

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 Reprimand by Consent submitted by the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland, Petitioner, and Woodley B. Osborne, Respondent. The Court having considered the petition, it is this 3rd day of September, 1998,

ORDERED by the Court of Appeals of Maryland that the Respondent, Woodley B. Osborne, be, and he hereby is, reprimanded for misconduct in violation of Rules 1.15(a) and 5.3(c)(2) of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct; and it is further

ORDERED that the Respondent shall complete a continuing legal education course in professional responsibility, approved in advance by the District of Columbia’s Bar Counsel, and that the Respondent shall certify his completion of such a course to this Court, with a copy to Maryland’s Bar Counsel, within six months from the date of an Opinion and Order by which the District of Columbia Court of Appeals disciplined the Respondent for the same misconduct set forth herein.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

716 A.2d 1029, 351 Md. 132, 1998 Md. LEXIS 1074, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/attorney-grievance-commission-v-osborne-md-1998.