In Re Douglas

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

In Re Douglas

959 A.2d 64, 2008 D.C. App. LEXIS 418, 2008 WL 4657529

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 23, 2008

Docket08-BG-1098

StatusPublished

This text of 959 A.2d 64 (In Re Douglas) 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 Douglas, 959 A.2d 64, 2008 D.C. App. LEXIS 418, 2008 WL 4657529 (D.C. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On further consideration of the certified copy of the notice from the Court of Appeals of Maryland acknowledging that respondent was disbarred by consent, effective August 14, 2008, this court’s September 19, 2008, order that suspended respondent from the practice of law and directed her to show cause why identical *65 reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, the response thereto wherein respondent consents to disbarment in this jurisdiction, the reply from Bar Counsel, and it appearing that respondent has failed to file the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

ORDERED that Yalonda M. Douglas is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. For purposes of filing a motion for reinstatement, this period of disbarment will not commence to run, until such time as respondent 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 further consideration of the certified copy of the notice from the Court of Appeals of Maryland acknowledging that respondent was disbarred by consent, effective August 14, 2008, this court’s September 19, 2008, order that suspended respondent from the practice of law and directed her to show cause why identical *65 reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, the response thereto wherein respondent consents to disbarment in this jurisdiction, the reply from Bar Counsel, and it appearing that respondent has failed to file the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

ORDERED that Yalonda M. Douglas is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. For purposes of filing a motion for reinstatement, this period of disbarment will not commence to run, until such time as respondent files an affidavit that fully complies with the requirements of D.C.Bar. R. XI, § 14(g).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

959 A.2d 64, 2008 D.C. App. LEXIS 418, 2008 WL 4657529, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-douglas-dc-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack