Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. O'Phelan
This text of Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. O'Phelan (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. O'Phelan) 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 24-DEC-2020 12:02 PM Dkt. 3 ORD
SCAD-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner,
vs.
DANIEL JOSEPH O’PHELAN, (Bar No. 7843), Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (ODC #18-0245, #20-0183)
ORDER OF TRANSFER TO INACTIVE STATUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)
Upon review of the December 22, 2020 petition filed by
the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) on behalf of, and with
the approval of, the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of
the State of Hawai#i, requesting this court to immediately
transfer Respondent Daniel J. O’Phelan to inactive status,
pursuant to Rules 2.19 (b) and 2.19(c) of the Rules of the
Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i (RSCH), we conclude
temporary transfer to inactive status is warranted, pending the
provision of further evidence in support of Respondent O’Phelan’s
assertions that he is currently incapable of practicing law or defending himself in a pending disciplinary matter. Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent Daniel J. O’Phelan
is immediately transferred to inactive status in this
jurisdiction, pursuant to RSCH Rules 2.19(b) and 2.19(c),
effective with the filing of this order. Respondent O’Phelan
shall remain on inactive status until further order of this
court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Daniel J.
O’Phelan shall submit, within 60 days of the entry date of this
order, further evidence in support of his assertions regarding
his incapacity, including medical documentation, obtained at his
expense.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that ODC shall in the interim
suspend and hold in abeyance proceedings against Respondent
O’Phelan to the extent required by RSCH Rule 2.19(h).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Disciplinary Board
shall, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.19(d), cause a notice of this
transfer to inactive status to be published in a newspaper of
general circulation in the judicial circuit in which Respondent
O’Phelan maintained his practice.
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the clerk of the court,
pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.19(e), shall transmit a certified copy of
this order to all judges of the State of Hawai#i and shall
2 request their assistance and such action as may be indicated,
pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.20, to protect the interests of both
Respondent O’Phelan and his clients, if any.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, December 24, 2020.
/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
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. O'Phelan, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-ophelan-haw-2020.