In re Jonathan Friedlander

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals
DecidedSeptember 28, 2017
Docket17-BG-535
StatusPublished

This text of In re Jonathan Friedlander (In re Jonathan Friedlander) 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 Jonathan Friedlander, (D.C. 2017).

Opinion

Notice: This opinion 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. 17-BG-535

IN RE JONATHAN K. FRIEDLANDER 2017 DDN 33 An Inactive Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Bar Reg. No. 433895

BEFORE: Beckwith, Associate Judge, and Steadman and Reid, Senior Judges.

ORDER (Filed – September 28, 2017)

On consideration of the certified order of the Maryland Court of Appeals disbarring respondent from the practice of law in the state of Maryland by consent; this court’s June 9, 2017, order temporarily suspending respondent and directing him to show cause why identical reciprocal discipline should not be imposed; the statement of Disciplinary Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline; respondent’s response in which he does not oppose identical reciprocal discipline; and it appearing that respondent filed the required D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14 (g) affidavit on July 6, 2017, it is

ORDERED that Jonathan K. Friedlander is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia nunc pro tunc to July 6, 2017. See In re Sibley, 990 A.2d 483, 487-88 (D.C. 2010) (explaining that the presumption of identical discipline in D.C. Bar R. XI, § 11 (c) will prevail except in “rare” cases); In re Cole, 809 A.2d 1226, 1227 n.3 (D.C. 2002) (explaining that in unopposed reciprocal matters the “imposition of identical discipline should be close to automatic”). PER CURIAM

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

Related

In Re Sibley
990 A.2d 483 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2010)
In Re Cole
809 A.2d 1226 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In re Jonathan Friedlander, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-jonathan-friedlander-dc-2017.