In Re Parsons

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

In Re Parsons

964 A.2d 207, 2009 D.C. App. LEXIS 7, 2009 WL 196039

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 29, 2009

DocketBar Registration 323709; 08-BG-420

StatusPublished

This text of 964 A.2d 207 (In Re Parsons) 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 Parsons, 964 A.2d 207, 2009 D.C. App. LEXIS 7, 2009 WL 196039 (D.C. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the certified opinion of the Maryland Court of Appeals disbarring respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction, see Atty. Grievance Comm’n v. Parsons, 404 Md. 175, 946 A.2d 437 (2008), this court’s May 13, 2008, order suspending respondent from the practice of law pending further action of the court and directing him to show cause why identical reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, and the report and recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility, to which no exceptions have been taken, and it appearing that respondent has failed to file either a response to this court’s order to show cause or the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

ORDERED that David Wayne Parsons is hereby disbarred from the practice of *208 law in the District of Columbia. In re Libby, 945 A.2d 1169 (D.C.2008). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement respondent’s disbarment will not begin to run until such time as he files an affidavit that fully complies with the requirements of D.C.Bar. R, XI, § 14(g).

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 disbarring respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction, see Atty. Grievance Comm’n v. Parsons, 404 Md. 175, 946 A.2d 437 (2008), this court’s May 13, 2008, order suspending respondent from the practice of law pending further action of the court and directing him to show cause why identical reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, and the report and recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility, to which no exceptions have been taken, and it appearing that respondent has failed to file either a response to this court’s order to show cause or the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

ORDERED that David Wayne Parsons is hereby disbarred from the practice of *208 law in the District of Columbia. In re Libby, 945 A.2d 1169 (D.C.2008). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement respondent’s disbarment will not begin to run until such time as he files an affidavit that fully complies with the requirements of D.C.Bar. R, XI, § 14(g).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

964 A.2d 207, 2009 D.C. App. LEXIS 7, 2009 WL 196039, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-parsons-dc-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack