Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Tatung

300 A.3d 200, 485 Md. 55

• Court: Court of Appeals of Maryland
• Decided: August 15, 2023
• Docket: 38ag/22
• Status: Published

Opinion

* IN THE ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE * COMMISSION OF MARYLAND SUPREME COURT * OF MARYLAND v. * AG No. 38 CELESTINE TATUNG * September Term, 2022 *

ORDER

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

Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland, and Respondent, Celestine Tatung, on

August 9, 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 Rule 1.15

(safekeeping property) of the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct and

Federal Immigration Rules of Professional Conduct of Practitioners, 8 C.F.R. §

1003.102(n) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice), (q)(1) and (2)

(diligence), and (r)(1)-(3) (communication) and that the Respondent consents to a

reprimand, it is this 15th day of August 2023

ORDERED, by the Supreme Court of Maryland, that the Respondent, Celestine

Tatung, is REPRIMANDED for violating Rule 1.15 (safekeeping property) of the District

of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct and Federal Immigration Rules of Professional

Conduct of Practitioners, 8 C.F.R. §1003.102(n) (conduct prejudicial to the administration

of justice), (q)(1) and (2) (diligence), and (r)(1)-(3) (communication). Pursuant to the Maryland Uniform Electronic Legal Materials Act (§§ 10-1601 et seq. of the State Government Article) this document is authentic.

2023-08-15 14:01-04:00 Shirley M. Watts Senior Justice

Gregory Hilton, Clerk