Attorney Grievance Commission v. Tan

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Tan

146 A.3d 459, 450 Md. 96

Court of Appeals of Maryland·Decided September 22, 2016·No. Misc. Docket AG No. 39·Published

Opinion

ORDER

This matter having come before the Court upon the filing of a Joint Consent Motion for Suspension, it is this 22nd day of September, 2016,

ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, in accordance with Maryland Rule 19-737, that Respondent Jing Tan, Esquire, is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Maryland for sixty (60) days based on her misconduct involving the former Maryland Lawyers’ Rules of Professional Conduct (MLRPC) 1.1,1.4,1.6, 1.6(a), 1.15(a), 7.1(a) and 8.4(a) and (d).

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

ORDER

This matter having come before the Court upon the filing of a Joint Consent Motion for Suspension, it is this 22nd day of September, 2016,

ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, in accordance with Maryland Rule 19-737, that Respondent Jing Tan, Esquire, is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Maryland for sixty (60) days based on her misconduct involving the former Maryland Lawyers’ Rules of Professional Conduct (MLRPC) 1.1,1.4,1.6, 1.6(a), 1.15(a), 7.1(a) and 8.4(a) and (d).

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Tan, 146 A.3d 459, 450 Md. 96 (Md. 2016).

Pincite

146 A.3d 459 (Attorney Grievance Commission v. Tan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.