Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Allen
This text of Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Allen (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Allen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hawaii Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCAD-XX-XXXXXXX 26-MAY-2023 02:00 PM Dkt. 21 OSUS
SCAD-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI
OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner,
vs.
GEORGE M. ALLEN, (HI Bar #2664), Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (ODC Case No. 22-0022)
ORDER OF RECIPROCAL SUSPENSION (By: Recktenwald, C.J., McKenna, and Eddins, JJ., Intermediate Court of Appeals Chief Judge Ginoza, in place of Nakayama, J., recused, and Intermediate Court of Appeals Associate Judge Leonard, assigned by reason of vacancy)
Upon consideration of the petition for the imposition
of reciprocal discipline upon Respondent George M. Allen, filed
on March 23, 2023 by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC)
pursuant to Rule 2.15 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the
State of Hawaiʻi (RSCH), the declaration and exhibits appended
thereto, the May 16, 2023 amended declaration submitted by
Bradley R. Tamm, ODC Chief Disciplinary Counsel, indicating that Respondent Allen does not oppose the imposition of reciprocal
discipline, and the record in this matter, we conclude the
record submitted supports the imposition of a two-year
reciprocal suspension in this jurisdiction. We note Respondent
Allen remains administratively suspended in this jurisdiction.
Finally, we note that previous attempts at service to Respondent
Allen’s address registered with the Hawaiʻi State Bar Association
have been unsuccessful, and note ODC has identified an alternate
address in California, and an email address, for communication
with Allen. Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for reciprocal
discipline is granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Allen is
suspended from the practice of law in this jurisdiction for two
years, effective upon entry of this order, RSCH Rule 2.16(c)
notwithstanding, in light of his current administrative
suspension. Respondent Allen shall, however, file an affidavit
or declaration, within 40 days of the entry date of this order,
complying with the requirements of RSCH Rule 2.16(d).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Allen shall bear
the costs of this reciprocal disciplinary proceeding upon the
approval of a timely submitted Verified Bill of Costs, pursuant
to RSCH Rule 2.3(c), and shall be required to submit, as a
prerequisite to reinstatement, proof of payment of any such bill 2 of costs and proof of his compliance with the disciplinary
conditions imposed upon him in Colorado and his reinstatement to
good standing in that jurisdiction.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Disciplinary Board of
the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court shall comply with RSCH Rule 2.16(e)
with regard to general notice of Allen’s suspension, and the
clerk of the court shall comply with RSCH Rule 2.16(f) regarding
the notice to the judges of the State of Hawaiʻi.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to RSCH Rule
2.11(b), the clerk shall serve the instant order and any future
documents on Respondent Allen at the California address and, as
a courtesy, the email address found at Docket 3:3 in the record.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, May 26, 2023.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Todd W. Eddins
/s/ Lisa M. Ginoza
/s/ Katherine G. Leonard
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Allen, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-allen-haw-2023.