Attorney Grievance v. Stringer

291 A.3d 1144, 483 Md. 293

Opinion

*

IN THE

ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE * COMMISSION OF MARYLAND SUPREME COURT

*

OF MARYLAND

v. * AG No. 52

DAVID H. STRINGER * September Term, 2022

*

ORDER

In its Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action, the Attorney Grievance

Commission requested that the Court impose reciprocal discipline to that imposed by the

State Bar of Arizona, specifically Rule 8.2(a) of the Arizona Rules of Professional

Conduct. Pursuant to Rule 19-737(e), the Court required the Commission to serve the

respondent with the petition and required the Commission and the respondent to show

cause why reciprocal discipline should not be imposed. Both parties filed responses. In his

response, Mr. Stringer argues that exceptional circumstances exist to not impose reciprocal

discipline. The Court concludes that Mr. Stringer did not demonstrate by clear and

convincing evidence that exceptional circumstances exist that warrant substantially

different discipline.

Accordingly, it is this 24th day of March 2023, by the Supreme Court of Maryland,

ORDERED that David H. Stringer is reprimanded for violation of Rule 8.2(a) of the

Arizona 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.

/s/ Matthew J. Fader

2023-03-24 13:37-04:00

Chief Justice

Gregory Hilton, Clerk