Disciplinary Board of the Hawaii Supreme Court v. Taylor
This text of Disciplinary Board of the Hawaii Supreme Court v. Taylor (Disciplinary Board of the Hawaii Supreme Court v. Taylor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hawaii Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPR-16-0000626 04-OCT-2016 11:24 AM SCPR-16-0000626
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE HAWAI'I SUPREME COURT,
Petitioner,
vs.
JEFFREY M. TAYLOR,
Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(ODC Case Nos. 13-024-9094 and 14-011-9154)
ORDER ALLOWING RESIGNATION IN LIEU OF DISCIPLINE
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)
Upon consideration of the petition submitted by the
Disciplinary Board of the Hawai'i Supreme Court for an order granting the request of attorney Jeffrey M. Taylor to resign from
the practice of law in lieu of discipline, and the affidavits and
exhibits attached in support thereof, we note the petition is
supported by Respondent Taylor’s affidavit, which meets the
requirements of Rule 2.14(a) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of
the State of Hawai'i (RSCH), and in which Respondent Taylor avers and admits to misconduct that represents multiple violations of
Rules 1.1, 1.2(a), 1.3, 1.4(a), 1.4(b), 1.6(a), 1.8(e),
1.15(f)(3), 1.15(g), 1.16(d), 3.2, 3.4(e), 4.2 and 8.4(c) of the
Hawai'i Rules of Professional Conduct (1994), and which constitutes misconduct sufficient to justify granting the
petition. Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition to resign in
lieu of discipline is granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Taylor’s
resignation shall become effective 30 days after the date of this
order, as provided by RSCH Rules 2.14(d) and 2.16(c).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this court
shall remove Jeffrey M. Taylor’s name from the role of attorneys
licensed to practice law in this jurisdiction and, within thirty
days after entry of this order, Respondent Taylor shall submit to
the Clerk the original certificate evidencing his license to
practice law in this jurisdiction or an affidavit establishing
good cause for his failure to do so.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Taylor shall comply with the requirements of RSCH Rule 2.16 governing disbarred attorneys and the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai'i shall provide notice of the disbarment as required by RSCH Rules 2.16(e) and 2.16(f). IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Respondent Taylor shall
bear the costs of these proceedings upon the timely submission by
ODC of a verified bill of costs, as authorized by RSCH Rule
2.3(c).
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, October 4, 2016. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Disciplinary Board of the Hawaii Supreme Court v. Taylor, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/disciplinary-board-of-the-hawaii-supreme-court-v-taylor-haw-2016.