In re Jones

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

In re Jones

45 A.3d 162, 2012 WL 2044360

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 7, 2012

DocketNo. 12-BG-220

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 45 A.3d 162 (In re Jones) 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 Jones, 45 A.3d 162, 2012 WL 2044360 (D.C. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the certified opinion of the Maryland Court of Appeals indefinitely suspending respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction with the right to file for reinstatement in six-months, see Attorney Grievance Com’n of Maryland v. Jones, 424 Md. 626, 37 A.3d 316 (2012), this court’s March 19, 2012, order suspending respondent pending further action of the court and directing him to show cause why the functional equivalent reciprocal discipline of a six-month suspension with a fitness requirement should not be imposed, the statement of respondent consenting to reciprocal discipline, the statement of Bar Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline, and respondent’s D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g) affidavit that was filed on March 29, 2012, it is

ORDERED that Daryl D. Jones is hereby suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for a period of six-months, subject to a showing of fitness, nunc pro tunc to March 29, 2012. See In re Zdravkovich, 831 A.2d 964 (D.C.2003).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the certified opinion of the Maryland Court of Appeals indefinitely suspending respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction with the right to file for reinstatement in six-months, see Attorney Grievance Com’n of Maryland v. Jones, 424 Md. 626, 37 A.3d 316 (2012), this court’s March 19, 2012, order suspending respondent pending further action of the court and directing him to show cause why the functional equivalent reciprocal discipline of a six-month suspension with a fitness requirement should not be imposed, the statement of respondent consenting to reciprocal discipline, the statement of Bar Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline, and respondent’s D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g) affidavit that was filed on March 29, 2012, it is

ORDERED that Daryl D. Jones is hereby suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for a period of six-months, subject to a showing of fitness, nunc pro tunc to March 29, 2012. See In re Zdravkovich, 831 A.2d 964 (D.C.2003).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

45 A.3d 162, 2012 WL 2044360, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-jones-dc-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack