In Re Haas

980 A.2d 1228, 2009 WL 3125347
District of Columbia Court of Appeals·Decided October 1, 2009·No. 09-BG-749·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Order suspending respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction see Matter of Haas, 8 A.D.3d 732, 770 N.Y.S.2d 663 [2004], this court’s July 21, 2009, order suspending respondent from the practice of law in this jurisdiction pending further action of the court and directing him to show cause why identical reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, respondent’s failure to respond to that order, and the statement of Bar Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline; and it appearing that respondent has failed to file the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

ORDERED that Richard J. Haas, is hereby suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for a period of three years with reinstatement conditioned on a showing of fitness. See Rules of Prof. Conduct, 1.13 (duty to represent client diligently) & 1.15 a safekeeping property; In *1229 re Fair, 780 A.2d 1106 (D.C.2001); In re Belli, 766 A.2d 526, 527 (D.C.2001). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement respondent’s suspension 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

In Re Haas, 980 A.2d 1228, 2009 WL 3125347 (D.C. 2009).

980 A.2d 1228 (In Re Haas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re Fair
780 A.2d 1106 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2001)
In Re Belli
766 A.2d 526 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2001)
In re Haas
3 A.D.3d 732 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Broome County District Attorney's Office v. Meagher
8 A.D.3d 732 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)