In re Dana Paul

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

In re Dana Paul

194 A.3d 386

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 4, 2018

Docket18-BG-751

StatusPublished

This text of 194 A.3d 386 (In re Dana Paul) 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 Dana Paul, 194 A.3d 386 (D.C. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

On consideration of the certified order of the Court of Appeals of Maryland suspending respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction for thirty days; this court's July 19, 2018, order directing respondent to show cause why reciprocal discipline should not be imposed; and the statement of Disciplinary Counsel; and it appearing that respondent failed to file a response to the court's show cause order but did file his D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14 (g) affidavit on August 2, 2018, it is

ORDERED that Dana A. Paul is hereby suspended from the practice of law in this jurisdiction for a period of thirty days nunc pro tunc to August 2, 2018. See In re Sibley , 990 A.2d 483 (D.C. 2010) ; In re Fuller , 930 A.2d 194 , 198 (D.C. 2007) (rebuttable presumption of identical reciprocal discipline applies to all cases in which the respondent does not participate).

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

PER CURIAM

On consideration of the certified order of the Court of Appeals of Maryland suspending respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction for thirty days; this court's July 19, 2018, order directing respondent to show cause why reciprocal discipline should not be imposed; and the statement of Disciplinary Counsel; and it appearing that respondent failed to file a response to the court's show cause order but did file his D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14 (g) affidavit on August 2, 2018, it is

ORDERED that Dana A. Paul is hereby suspended from the practice of law in this jurisdiction for a period of thirty days nunc pro tunc to August 2, 2018. See In re Sibley , 990 A.2d 483 (D.C. 2010) ; In re Fuller , 930 A.2d 194 , 198 (D.C. 2007) (rebuttable presumption of identical reciprocal discipline applies to all cases in which the respondent does not participate).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

194 A.3d 386, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-dana-paul-dc-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack