Attorney Grievance Commission v. Whittle

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Whittle

131 A.3d 388, 446 Md. 253

Court of Appeals of Maryland·Decided February 8, 2016·No. Misc. Docket AG No. 50·Published

Opinion

ORDER

This matter having come before the Court upon the filing of a Joint Petition for Reprimand by Consent, and the Court having considered same,

NOW, THEREFORE, it is this 8th day of February, 2016,

ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that Arthur John Whittle, Respondent, is hereby reprimanded for engaging in professional misconduct that violated Rules 1.4(a)(2) and 8.1(b) of the Maryland Lawyers’ Rules of Professional Conduct.

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 Petition for Reprimand by Consent, and the Court having considered same,

NOW, THEREFORE, it is this 8th day of February, 2016,

ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that Arthur John Whittle, Respondent, is hereby reprimanded for engaging in professional misconduct that violated Rules 1.4(a)(2) and 8.1(b) of the Maryland Lawyers’ Rules of Professional Conduct.

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Whittle, 131 A.3d 388, 446 Md. 253 (Md. 2016).

Pincite

131 A.3d 388 (Attorney Grievance Commission v. Whittle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.