In Re Beggin

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

In Re Beggin

967 A.2d 180, 2009 D.C. App. LEXIS 37, 2009 WL 612558

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 12, 2009

Docket08-BG-1605

StatusPublished

This text of 967 A.2d 180 (In Re Beggin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Re Beggin, 967 A.2d 180, 2009 D.C. App. LEXIS 37, 2009 WL 612558 (D.C. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the certified order of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania disbarring respondent by consent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction, see Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Beggin, No. 150 DB 2005 (Pa. Sep. 15, 2008), this court’s January 6, 2009, order suspending respondent from the practice of law in this jurisdiction pending further action of the court and directing him to show cause why identical reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, and the statement of Bar Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline, and it appearing that respondent has failed to file either a response to this court’s order to show cause or the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

ORDERED that John F. Beggin is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. See In re Gerideau, 960 A.2d 625 (D.C.2008). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement respondent’s disbarment will not begin to run until such time as he files an affidavit that fully complies with the requirements of D.C.Bar. R. XI, § 14(g).

*181 1

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the certified order of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania disbarring respondent by consent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction, see Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Beggin, No. 150 DB 2005 (Pa. Sep. 15, 2008), this court’s January 6, 2009, order suspending respondent from the practice of law in this jurisdiction pending further action of the court and directing him to show cause why identical reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, and the statement of Bar Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline, and it appearing that respondent has failed to file either a response to this court’s order to show cause or the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

ORDERED that John F. Beggin is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. See In re Gerideau, 960 A.2d 625 (D.C.2008). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement respondent’s disbarment will not begin to run until such time as he files an affidavit that fully complies with the requirements of D.C.Bar. R. XI, § 14(g).

*181 1

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

967 A.2d 180, 2009 D.C. App. LEXIS 37, 2009 WL 612558, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-beggin-dc-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack