Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. Wu

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. Wu

162 A.3d 835, 453 Md. 353, 2017 WL 2634044, 2017 Md. LEXIS 398

CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland

DecidedJune 19, 2017

DocketMisc. Docket AG No. 121, Sept. Term, 2016

StatusPublished

This text of 162 A.3d 835 (Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. Wu) 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. Wu, 162 A.3d 835, 453 Md. 353, 2017 WL 2634044, 2017 Md. LEXIS 398 (Md. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Upon consideration of the Joint Petition for Disbarment by Consent filed herein pursuant to Maryland Rule 19-736, and Respondent's acknowledgment therein that sufficient evidence exists to sustain allegations that he committed professional misconduct in violation of Rules 1.15(a) and (d), 8.4(a), (b), (c), and (d) of the Maryland Lawyers' Rules of Professional Conduct, in effect prior to July 1, 2016, Maryland Rules 16-604, 16-605, 16-606.1, 16-607, and 16-609, in effect prior to July 1, 2016, and Business Occupations and Professions Article § 10-304 and § 10-306 and § 10-307, it is this 19th day of June, 2017,

ORDERED, that Respondent, James P. Wu, be and he is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Maryland, effective immediately; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk of this Court shall strike the name of James P. Wu from the register of attorneys in this Court, notify Respondent of such action, 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

Upon consideration of the Joint Petition for Disbarment by Consent filed herein pursuant to Maryland Rule 19-736, and Respondent's acknowledgment therein that sufficient evidence exists to sustain allegations that he committed professional misconduct in violation of Rules 1.15(a) and (d), 8.4(a), (b), (c), and (d) of the Maryland Lawyers' Rules of Professional Conduct, in effect prior to July 1, 2016, Maryland Rules 16-604, 16-605, 16-606.1, 16-607, and 16-609, in effect prior to July 1, 2016, and Business Occupations and Professions Article § 10-304 and § 10-306 and § 10-307, it is this 19th day of June, 2017,

ORDERED, that Respondent, James P. Wu, be and he is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Maryland, effective immediately; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk of this Court shall strike the name of James P. Wu from the register of attorneys in this Court, notify Respondent of such action, and comply with the notice provisions set forth in Maryland Rule 19-761(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

162 A.3d 835, 453 Md. 353, 2017 WL 2634044, 2017 Md. LEXIS 398, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/attorney-grievance-commn-of-md-v-wu-md-2017.