In re Rosen

15 A.3d 713, 2011 D.C. App. LEXIS 143, 2011 WL 1044628
District of Columbia Court of Appeals·Decided March 24, 2011·No. No. 10-BG-1631·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

On consideration of the certified order of the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board revoking respondent’s license to practice law by consent, this court’s January 13, 2011, order suspending respondent pending further action of the court and directing him to show cause why identical reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, the statement of Bar Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline, and it appearing that respondent has failed to file a response either to this court’s order to show cause or the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

ORDERED that Sol Z. Rosen, Esquire is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. See In re Bogollagama, 979 A.2d 629 (D.C.2009)(disbarment is the functional equivalent of a revocation imposed in Virginia). Also see In re Fuller, 930 A.2d 194, 198 (D.C.2007) and In re Willingham, 900 A.2d 165 (D.C.2006) (rebuttable presumption of identical reciprocal discipline applies to all cases in which the respondent does not participate, including those involving disbarment). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement respondent’s suspension 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

In re Rosen, 15 A.3d 713, 2011 D.C. App. LEXIS 143, 2011 WL 1044628 (D.C. 2011).

15 A.3d 713 (In re Rosen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re Bogollagama
979 A.2d 629 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2009)
In Re Fuller
930 A.2d 194 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2007)
In re Willingham
900 A.2d 165 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2006)