In re DeWitt

683 A.2d 456, 1996 D.C. App. LEXIS 191, 1996 WL 562441
District of Columbia Court of Appeals·Decided October 3, 1996·No. No. 95-BG-131·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Board on Professional Responsibility has recommended that Llewellyn DeWitt be disbarred. This recommendation is based upon the finding of Hearing Committee No. 1 that DeWitt intentionally misappropriated the funds of an estate for which he was the personal representative and the finding of Hearing Committee No. 7 that DeWitt recklessly misappropriated funds from a client trust fund.1 The Board concluded, inter alia, that the findings of both Hearing Committees were supported by the evidence, and that there were no significant mitigating factors.

DeWitt has not filed exceptions to the Board’s recommendations, and our standard of review is narrowly circumscribed. See D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9(g); In re Goldsborough, 654 A.2d 1285, 1287-88 (D.C.1995). Under these circumstances, disbarment is the appropriate sanction. In re Addams, 579 A.2d 190, 191 (D.C.1990) (en banc); In re Pels, 653 A.2d 388, 389 (D.C.1995). Accordingly, Llewellyn DeWitt is hereby disbarred, effective thirty days after the date of this order.2

So ordered.

Footnotes

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

In re DeWitt, 683 A.2d 456, 1996 D.C. App. LEXIS 191, 1996 WL 562441 (D.C. 1996).

683 A.2d 456 (In re DeWitt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re Pels
653 A.2d 388 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1995)
In Re Goldsborough
654 A.2d 1285 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1995)
Matter of Addams
579 A.2d 190 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1990)