In re Ames
Opinion
This is a reciprocal disciplinary matter under D.C. Bar R. XI, § 11.
Respondent was publicly censured by the Supreme Court of Arizona for failure to act diligently and to communicate adequately with respect to the handling of litigation for two clients in that state. In one case, because respondent failed to comply with a court order to respond to pleadings, supplement discovery and file lists of witnesses and [734] exhibits, judgment was entered against his client. A subsequent motion by new counsel to vacate the judgment was granted, subject to payment by the client of the opposing party’s costs and attorneys fees.1 In the other matter, respondent failed to pursue his client’s claim in a diligent manner and to maintain adequate communication with the client.
We accept the recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility, uncontested by respondent, that reciprocal discipline be imposed here. Accordingly, respondent is hereby publicly censured by this court.
So ordered.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
632 A.2d 733 (In re Ames) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.