In Re Hawn

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

In Re Hawn

917 A.2d 693, 2007 D.C. App. LEXIS 86, 2007 WL 610906

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 1, 2007

Docket06-BG-1418

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 917 A.2d 693 (In Re Hawn) 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 Hawn, 917 A.2d 693, 2007 D.C. App. LEXIS 86, 2007 WL 610906 (D.C. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The respondent, Gregory Hawn, falsified his resume and altered his law school transcripts in an attempt to obtain legal employment in California. While he did report his actions to Bar Counsel, it was not until after his misdeeds had been questioned by a prospective employer and his law school. In any event, the Board on Professional Responsibility (“the Board”), on review of a Hearing Committee’s report, concluded that respondent violated Rule 8.4(c) of the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct, and as discipline for this violation the Board recommends that respondent be suspended for 30 days.

Bar Counsel informs us that he takes no exception to the Board’s report and recommendation, and respondent has not filed any opposition to the Board’s report and recommendation. This lack of opposition severely limits our scope of review and we *694 hereby accept the Board’s recommendation. See D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9(g)(1). Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that Gregory Hawn be suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for a period of thirty-days. For the purposes of reinstatement, the suspension shall be deemed to run from the date that respondent files an affidavit in compliance with D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g).

So ordered.

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

PER CURIAM:

The respondent, Gregory Hawn, falsified his resume and altered his law school transcripts in an attempt to obtain legal employment in California. While he did report his actions to Bar Counsel, it was not until after his misdeeds had been questioned by a prospective employer and his law school. In any event, the Board on Professional Responsibility (“the Board”), on review of a Hearing Committee’s report, concluded that respondent violated Rule 8.4(c) of the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct, and as discipline for this violation the Board recommends that respondent be suspended for 30 days.

Bar Counsel informs us that he takes no exception to the Board’s report and recommendation, and respondent has not filed any opposition to the Board’s report and recommendation. This lack of opposition severely limits our scope of review and we *694 hereby accept the Board’s recommendation. See D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9(g)(1). Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that Gregory Hawn be suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for a period of thirty-days. For the purposes of reinstatement, the suspension shall be deemed to run from the date that respondent files an affidavit in compliance with D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g).

So ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

917 A.2d 693, 2007 D.C. App. LEXIS 86, 2007 WL 610906, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-hawn-dc-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack