Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Bancroft

CourtHawaii Supreme Court
DecidedApril 16, 2021
DocketSCAD-21-0000096
StatusPublished

This text of Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Bancroft (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Bancroft) 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.

Bluebook
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Bancroft, (haw 2021).

Opinion

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCAD-XX-XXXXXXX 16-APR-2021 08:49 AM Dkt. 10 OSUS

SCAD-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner,

vs.

BROOKS L. BANCROFT, Respondent.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (ODC Case Nos. 19-0504, 20-0100)

ORDER OF SUSPENSION (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)

Upon review of the March 3, 2021 petition, filed by the

Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC), requesting this court,

pursuant to Rule 2.12A of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the

State of Hawai#i (RSCH), to require Respondent Brooks L. Bancroft

to show cause as to why he should not be immediately suspended

from the practice of law for failing to cooperate with ODC in its

lawful investigations into allegations of misconduct committed by

Respondent Bancroft, this court’s March 9, 2021 order to show

cause, the lack of a response by Respondent Bancroft, and the

record in this matter, we conclude that granting the petition is warranted and supported by the record. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition is granted.

Respondent Bancroft is suspended from the practice of law,

effective immediately upon the filing of this order, and until

further order of this court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this order imposing

suspension upon Respondent Bancroft shall constitute a suspension

for the purposes of RSCH Rule 2.16. The Disciplinary Board of

the Hawai#i Supreme Court and Respondent Bancroft shall therefore

comply with the relevant requirements of that Rule.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall forthwith

distribute a copy of this order to all judges, pursuant to RSCH

Rule 2.16(f). Distribution may be by electronic mail.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, April 16, 2021.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Bancroft, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-bancroft-haw-2021.