In re Daniel

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

In re Daniel

964 A.2d 595, 2009 WL 256077

District of Columbia Court of Appeals·Decided February 5, 2009·No. No. 07-BG-1271·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the certified order of the Supreme Court of Colorado disbarring respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction, see People v. Daniel, No. 07PDJ026 (Colo. Mar. 17, 2008), this court’s January 7, 2008, order suspending respondent from the practice of law pending further action of the court and directing him to show cause why identical reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, and the report and recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility, to which no exceptions have been taken, 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 Royal Daniel, III, is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. In re Addams, 579 A.2d 190, 191, 194 (D.C.1990)(en banc); accord, In re Devaney, 870 A.2d 53 (D.C.2005). 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)

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 Colorado disbarring respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction, see People v. Daniel, No. 07PDJ026 (Colo. Mar. 17, 2008), this court’s January 7, 2008, order suspending respondent from the practice of law pending further action of the court and directing him to show cause why identical reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, and the report and recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility, to which no exceptions have been taken, 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 Royal Daniel, III, is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. In re Addams, 579 A.2d 190, 191, 194 (D.C.1990)(en banc); accord, In re Devaney, 870 A.2d 53 (D.C.2005). 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)

In re Daniel, 964 A.2d 595, 2009 WL 256077 (D.C. 2009).

Pincite

964 A.2d 595 (In re Daniel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related