In re Steven Mirsky

170 A.3d 169
District of Columbia Court of Appeals·Decided September 28, 2017·No. 17-BG-567·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

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. Friedlan-der 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”).

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

In re Steven Mirsky, 170 A.3d 169 (D.C. 2017).

170 A.3d 169 (In re Steven Mirsky) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

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)