In re Marshall

171 A.3d 183
CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals
DecidedOctober 12, 2017
DocketNo. 17-BG-695
StatusPublished

This text of 171 A.3d 183 (In re Marshall) 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 Marshall, 171 A.3d 183 (D.C. 2017).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

On consideration of the certified consent order from the state of Virginia that imposed an indefinite impairment suspension, this court’s July 21, 2017, order suspend[184]*184ing respondent and directing her to show cause why she should not be indefinitely suspended pursuant to a disability suspension under D.C. Bar R. XI § 13, and the statement of Disciplinary Counsel, and it appearing that respondent has not filed a response to the court’s order or a D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14 (g) affidavit, it is

ORDERED that Kimberly L. Marshall is hereby indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI13. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that respondent’s attention is'directed to the requirements of D.C. Bar R. XI § 13 (g) for reinstatement, as well as D.C., Bar R. XI § 14 relating to suspended attorneys and to the provisions of Rule XI § 16 (c) dealing with the timing of eligibility for reinstatement as related to compliance with D.C. Bar R. XI § 14, including the filing of the required affidavit.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
171 A.3d 183, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-marshall-dc-2017.