Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. Momodu

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. Momodu

165 A.3d 496, 454 Md. 716, 2017 WL 3206536, 2017 Md. LEXIS 472

CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland

DecidedJuly 28, 2017

DocketMisc. Docket AG, No. 16, Sept. Term, 2017

StatusPublished

This text of 165 A.3d 496 (Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. Momodu) 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 Comm'n of Md. v. Momodu, 165 A.3d 496, 454 Md. 716, 2017 WL 3206536, 2017 Md. LEXIS 472 (Md. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

This matter having come before the Court upon the filing of a Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action, with attached certified copy of an Order entered December 14, 2016, whereby the United States District Court for the District of Maryland indefinitely suspended Lawal Momodu from the Bar of that Court, with a right to apply for reinstatement no sooner than one year from the date of the Order; and it appearing that said Lawal Momodu is admitted to the Bar of this Court;

NOW, THEREFORE, it is this 28th day of July, 2017, **717ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, in accordance with Maryland Rule 19-737(d), that Lawal Momodu, Respondent, is hereby suspended, effective immediately, from the practice of law in the State of Maryland, pending further order of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk of this Court shall strike the name of Lawal Momodu from the register of attorneys in this Court and comply with the notice provisions of Maryland Rule 19-761(6).

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

This matter having come before the Court upon the filing of a Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action, with attached certified copy of an Order entered December 14, 2016, whereby the United States District Court for the District of Maryland indefinitely suspended Lawal Momodu from the Bar of that Court, with a right to apply for reinstatement no sooner than one year from the date of the Order; and it appearing that said Lawal Momodu is admitted to the Bar of this Court;

NOW, THEREFORE, it is this 28th day of July, 2017, **717ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, in accordance with Maryland Rule 19-737(d), that Lawal Momodu, Respondent, is hereby suspended, effective immediately, from the practice of law in the State of Maryland, pending further order of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk of this Court shall strike the name of Lawal Momodu from the register of attorneys in this Court and comply with the notice provisions of Maryland Rule 19-761(6).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

165 A.3d 496, 454 Md. 716, 2017 WL 3206536, 2017 Md. LEXIS 472, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/attorney-grievance-commn-of-md-v-momodu-md-2017.