In re Jonas

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

In re Jonas

186 A.3d 801

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 21, 2018

DocketNo. 18–BG–412

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.3d 801 (In re Jonas) 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 Jonas, 186 A.3d 801 (D.C. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

On consideration of the certified order of the Supreme Court of Texas accepting respondent's resignation in lieu of disciplinary proceedings; this court's April 27, 2018, order suspending respondent and directing him to show cause why the functionally-equivalent discipline of disbarment should not be imposed; and the statement of Disciplinary Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline; and it appearing that respondent failed to file a response to this court's order to show cause or his D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14 (g) affidavit, it is

ORDERED that W. James Jonas, III, is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. See In re Sibley , 990 A.2d 483 (D.C. 2010), and In re Fuller , 930 A.2d 194, 198 (D.C. 2007) (rebuttable presumption of identical reciprocal discipline applies to all cases in which the respondent does not participate). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement respondent's period of disbarment will not begin to run until such time as he files a D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14 (g) affidavit.

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

PER CURIAM

On consideration of the certified order of the Supreme Court of Texas accepting respondent's resignation in lieu of disciplinary proceedings; this court's April 27, 2018, order suspending respondent and directing him to show cause why the functionally-equivalent discipline of disbarment should not be imposed; and the statement of Disciplinary Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline; and it appearing that respondent failed to file a response to this court's order to show cause or his D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14 (g) affidavit, it is

ORDERED that W. James Jonas, III, is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. See In re Sibley , 990 A.2d 483 (D.C. 2010), and In re Fuller , 930 A.2d 194, 198 (D.C. 2007) (rebuttable presumption of identical reciprocal discipline applies to all cases in which the respondent does not participate). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement respondent's period of disbarment will not begin to run until such time as he files a D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14 (g) affidavit.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.3d 801, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-jonas-dc-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack