Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Luke

Opinion

*

IN THE

ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE * COMMISSION OF MARYLAND SUPREME COURT

*

OF MARYLAND

v. * AG No. 83

PURCELL S. LUKE * September Term, 2022

*

ORDER

Upon consideration of the Joint Petition for Reprimand filed by the Petitioner, the

Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland, and Respondent, Purcell S. Luke, on

August 29, 2023, in the above-captioned case, in which the parties advise that the

Respondent agrees that his conduct, as described in the Joint Petition, violated Rules 1.1

(competence), 1.3 (diligence), 1.4(a) and (b) (communication), 1.15 (safekeeping

property), 1.16(d) (declining or terminating representation), 8.1(b) (disciplinary matters)

and 8.4(d) (misconduct) of the Maryland Attorneys’ Rules of Professional Conduct and

that the Respondent consents to a reprimand as the appropriate sanction, it is this 1st day

of September 2023

ORDERED, by the Supreme Court of Maryland, that the Respondent, Purcell S.

Luke, is REPRIMANDED for violating Rules 1.1 (competence), 1.3 (diligence), 1.4(a) and

(b) (communication), 1.15 (safekeeping property), 1.16(d) (declining or terminating

representation), 8.1(b) (disciplinary matters) and 8.4(d) (misconduct) of the Maryland

Attorneys’ Rules of Professional Conduct.

Pursuant to the Maryland Uniform Electronic Legal Materials Act (§§ 10-1601 et seq. of the State Government Article) this document is authentic.

2023-09-01 /s/ Michele D. Hotten 16:30-04:00 Justice Gregory Hilton, Clerk