In re Charles P. Ingenito

85 A.3d 102, 2014 WL 656859
CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals
DecidedFebruary 20, 2014
Docket13-BG-1247
StatusPublished

This text of 85 A.3d 102 (In re Charles P. Ingenito) 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 Charles P. Ingenito, 85 A.3d 102, 2014 WL 656859 (D.C. 2014).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the certified order of the Supreme Court of New Jersey disbarring respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction, this court’s November 21, 2013, order suspending respondent pending further action of the court and directing him to show cause why the reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, the statements of Bar Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline, respondent’s response to this court’s order to show cause, and the D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g) affidavit filed by respondent on January 7, 2014, it is

ORDERED that Charles P. Ingénito is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia, nunc pro tunc to January 7, 2014. Respondent may not re-argue his other disciplinary case in this court. See In re Zdravkovich, 881 A.2d 964 (D.C.2003). Further, as the underlying complaint in the state of New Jersey alleged knowing misappropriation, such a finding, if made in the first instance in this court, would result in disbarment. See, In re Addams, 579 A.2d 190 (D.C.1990) (en banc) (in virtually all cases of misappropriation, disbarment is the only appropriate sanction).

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

Related

Matter of Addams
579 A.2d 190 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
85 A.3d 102, 2014 WL 656859, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-charles-p-ingenito-dc-2014.