Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. Sud

178 A.3d 1240, 457 Md. 395
CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland
DecidedFebruary 8, 2018
DocketMisc. Docket AG No. 62, Sept. Term, 2017
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 178 A.3d 1240 (Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. Sud) 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. Sud, 178 A.3d 1240, 457 Md. 395 (Md. 2018).

Opinion

The Court of Appeals of Maryland, having considered the Joint Petition for Disbarment by Consent filed by Petitioner, the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland, and Respondent, Anuj Sud, it is the 8th, day of February, 2018;

ORDERED, that Anuj Sud, be, and he is hereby, disbarred, effective immediately, from the further practice of law in the State of Maryland for violating Maryland Lawyers' Rules of Professional Conduct 8.4(b) and (d); and it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk of this Court shall strike the name of Anuj Sud from the register of attorneys and, pursuant to Maryland Rule 19-761, shall certify the fact to the Trustees of the Client Protection Fund and the clerks of all judicial tribunals in the State.

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

Related

Linton v. Access Funding
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2022
Linton v. Consumer Protection Division
225 A.3d 456 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 2020)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
178 A.3d 1240, 457 Md. 395, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/attorney-grievance-commn-of-md-v-sud-md-2018.