In re Crane IV

• Court: District of Columbia Court of Appeals
• Decided: December 31, 2025
• Docket: 25-BG-0766
• Status: Published

Opinion

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS

No. 25-BG-0766

IN RE CLYDE C. CRANE, IV, RESPONDENT.

A Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals (Bar Registration No. 1003053)

On Report and Recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility Ad Hoc Hearing Committee Approving Petition for Negotiated Discipline (BDN: 24-ND-009; DDN: 2022-D213)

(Decided December 31, 2025)

Before BECKWITH and SHANKER, Associate Judges, and GLICKMAN, Senior Judge.

PER CURIAM: This decision is nonprecedential. Please refer to D.C. Bar

R. XI, § 12.1(d), governing the appropriate citation of this opinion.

In this disciplinary matter, the Hearing Committee recommends approval of

the parties’ petition for negotiated attorney discipline. Respondent Clyde C. Crane,

IV, acknowledged that he failed to comply with certain terms of his Virginia divorce

decree and the ensuing disciplinary investigation thereof, including failing to

respond to information requests from the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) and 2

failing to comply with an order of the Board on Professional Responsibility. As a

result, respondent admits that he violated Va. R. Pro. Conduct 3.4(d), D.C. R. Pro.

Conduct 8.1(b) and 8.4(d), and D.C. Bar R. XI, § 2(b)(3). The proposed discipline

consists of a thirty-day suspension, stayed in favor of one year of unsupervised

probation with conditions.

Having reviewed the Committee’s recommendation in accordance with our

procedures in these cases, see D.C. Bar R. XI, § 12.1(d), we agree that this case is

appropriate for negotiated discipline and “the agreed-upon sanction is justified,” In

re Mensah, 262 A.3d 1100, 1104 (D.C. 2021) (per curiam) (internal quotation marks

omitted), in light of reasonably analogous precedents. See, e.g., In re Lea, 969 A.2d

881 (D.C. 2009); In re Wemhoff, 142 A.3d 573 (D.C. 2016) (per curiam).

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that respondent Clyde C. Crane, IV, is hereby suspended from the

practice of law in the District of Columbia for thirty days, stayed in favor of one year

of unsupervised probation, with the following conditions:

(i) Respondent shall update his contact information with D.C. Bar Member

Services to include a current email address that he checks regularly and

a phone number at which he can be reliably reached. These updates 3

shall be made no later than thirty days after the date of this opinion, and

respondent shall provide proof of the updates to ODC.

(ii) Respondent shall comply with the terms of the Spousal Support

Modification Order issued in his divorce case on July 22, 2021, by the

Circuit Court for the County of Fairfax, Virginia. During the

probationary period, respondent shall send proof of compliance to ODC

by no later than the fifth day of each month.

If respondent does not comply with the terms of his probation, then ODC may

seek to revoke his probation, and, if he is found to have violated his probation, then

he may be required to serve the stayed thirty-day suspension, consecutively to any

other discipline or suspension that may be imposed in the event of a finding that

respondent has engaged in further ethical misconduct.

Additionally, we direct respondent’s attention to D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g),

which requires the filing of an affidavit with this court for purposes of reinstatement

in accordance with D.C. Bar R. XI, § 16, and Bd. Pro. Resp. R. 9.

So ordered.