In re Hill
This text of In re Hill (In re Hill) 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.
Opinion
Notice: This order is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS
No. 25-BG-0982
IN RE GUYLER ARDEN HILL, ESQUIRE, Respondent. A Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals BDN: 25-PD-051 Bar Registration No. 434921 DDN: 2024-D104
BEFORE: Easterly and Deahl, Associate Judges, and Thompson, Senior Judge.
ORDER (FILED—November 13, 2025)
On consideration of Disciplinary Counsel’s motion for leave to file under seal the Board on Professional Responsibility’s lodged consent petition to indefinitely suspend respondent from the practice of law based on disability pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, § 13(c), it is
ORDERED that the motion for leave is granted, and the Clerk shall file the lodged petition, which contains sensitive medical information, under seal. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the petition is granted, and respondent Guyler Arden Hill is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia on the grounds of disability, effective immediately, and any pending investigations or other disciplinary matters against respondent are held in abeyance. See D.C. Bar R. XI, § 13(c). It is
FURTHER ORDERED that respondent’s attention is drawn to the requirements of D.C. Bar R. XI, §§ 14 and 16, relating to suspended attorneys, and the provisions of D.C. Bar R XI, § 13(g), relating to reinstatement. It is
FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, that the case number is changed from No. 25-BS-0982 to No. 25-BG-0982 (as shown in the caption above) to reflect that this No. 25-BG-0982
matter is no longer “confidential” upon the entry of this order of suspension, see D.C. Bar R. XI, 17(b), although the petition will remain under seal as ordered.
PER CURIAM
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In re Hill, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-hill-dc-2025.