In Matter of Hutton

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

In Matter of Hutton

610 A.2d 110, 1992 R.I. LEXIS 161, 1992 WL 145231

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedJune 18, 1992

DocketNo. 92-327 M.P.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 610 A.2d 110 (In Matter of Hutton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Matter of Hutton, 610 A.2d 110, 1992 R.I. LEXIS 161, 1992 WL 145231 (R.I. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

[111]*111ORDER

The Respondent was suspended from the practice of law on July 22, 1991, pending further investigation by the Disciplinary Counsel. On June 4, 1992, pursuant to our Rule 42-13, Respondent filed an affidavit with this Court’s Disciplinary Board setting forth that he is aware that he is the subject of allegations that he has misappropriated clients’ funds. Respondent’s affidavit further sets forth that he fully and voluntarily consents to disbarment and that he is aware of the implications of submitting his consent to disbarment.

In Carter v. Fuyat, 571 A.2d 1126 (R.I.1990), we pointed out that “the affidavit and consent to disbarment filed by the Respondent have the same effect as a plea of nolo contendere entered by a defendant charged with a criminal offense. It constitutes an admission that the Respondent did, in fact, engage in the conduct of which he was accused.”

Upon review of the Respondent’s affidavit and consent to disbarment, we deem such an order appropriate.

Accordingly, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 42-13, it is hereby ordered that the Respondent, Thomas C. Hutton, be and he is hereby disbarred on consent from engaging in the practice of law.

Entered as an order of this Court this 18th day of June, 1992.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[111]*111ORDER

The Respondent was suspended from the practice of law on July 22, 1991, pending further investigation by the Disciplinary Counsel. On June 4, 1992, pursuant to our Rule 42-13, Respondent filed an affidavit with this Court’s Disciplinary Board setting forth that he is aware that he is the subject of allegations that he has misappropriated clients’ funds. Respondent’s affidavit further sets forth that he fully and voluntarily consents to disbarment and that he is aware of the implications of submitting his consent to disbarment.

In Carter v. Fuyat, 571 A.2d 1126 (R.I.1990), we pointed out that “the affidavit and consent to disbarment filed by the Respondent have the same effect as a plea of nolo contendere entered by a defendant charged with a criminal offense. It constitutes an admission that the Respondent did, in fact, engage in the conduct of which he was accused.”

Upon review of the Respondent’s affidavit and consent to disbarment, we deem such an order appropriate.

Accordingly, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 42-13, it is hereby ordered that the Respondent, Thomas C. Hutton, be and he is hereby disbarred on consent from engaging in the practice of law.

Entered as an order of this Court this 18th day of June, 1992.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

610 A.2d 110, 1992 R.I. LEXIS 161, 1992 WL 145231, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-matter-of-hutton-ri-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack