Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. Woo-Jin Kim

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. Woo-Jin Kim

146 A.3d 144, 450 Md. 49, 2016 Md. LEXIS 587

CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland

DecidedSeptember 16, 2016

DocketMisc. Docket AG No. 33, Sept. Term, 2016

StatusPublished

This text of 146 A.3d 144 (Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. Woo-Jin Kim) 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. Woo-Jin Kim, 146 A.3d 144, 450 Md. 49, 2016 Md. LEXIS 587 (Md. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

**49Upon consideration of the Joint Petition for Disbarment by Consent filed herein pursuant to Maryland Rule 19-736 and Respondent's acknowledgement therein that sufficient evidence exists to sustain allegations that he committed professional misconduct in violation of Rules 1.15(a) and 8.4(b), (c) & (d) of the Maryland Lawyers' Rules of Professional Conduct in effect at the time of the misconduct, it is this 16th day of September, 2016, *145ORDERED, that Woo-Jin Kim, Respondent, is hereby disbarred by consent from the practice of law in this State, effective immediately; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk of this Court shall strike the name of Woo-Jin Kim from the register of attorneys in this **50Court, notify Respondent of the filing of this order in accordance with Maryland Rule 19-742(a)(1), and comply with the notice provisions set forth in Maryland Rule 19-761(b).

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

**49Upon consideration of the Joint Petition for Disbarment by Consent filed herein pursuant to Maryland Rule 19-736 and Respondent's acknowledgement therein that sufficient evidence exists to sustain allegations that he committed professional misconduct in violation of Rules 1.15(a) and 8.4(b), (c) & (d) of the Maryland Lawyers' Rules of Professional Conduct in effect at the time of the misconduct, it is this 16th day of September, 2016, *145ORDERED, that Woo-Jin Kim, Respondent, is hereby disbarred by consent from the practice of law in this State, effective immediately; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk of this Court shall strike the name of Woo-Jin Kim from the register of attorneys in this **50Court, notify Respondent of the filing of this order in accordance with Maryland Rule 19-742(a)(1), and comply with the notice provisions set forth in Maryland Rule 19-761(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

146 A.3d 144, 450 Md. 49, 2016 Md. LEXIS 587, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/attorney-grievance-commn-of-md-v-woo-jin-kim-md-2016.