| Case Digest |
By Order of the Supreme Court dated September 12, 2005, Respondent, who was on inactive status for non-compliance with CLE obligations since March 2000, was suspended for two years as a result of various neglect and the unauthorized practice of law while on inactive status. During the disciplinary hearing, Disciplinary Counsel explicitly told Respondent that he was to cease and desist from representing clients and holding himself out as an attorney permitted to practice law until such time as the Supreme Court entered an Order returning him to active status. Respondent openly acknowledged on the record his consent and understanding of Disciplinary Counsel's admonition. Following the hearing, Office of Disciplinary Counsel received additional complaints (13 in all) about Respondent's continuing to practice law while on inactive status. Office of Disciplinary Counsel filed a Petition for Adjudication of Contempt in June of 2005. In November 2005 the Supreme Court held Respondent in willful violation of the March 17, 2000 Order transferring him to inactive status and remanded the matter to the Disciplinary Board for recommendation of the appropriate sanction. Following a hearing, the Hearing Committee recommended disbarment. In August 2006 the Disciplinary Board unanimously recommended disbarment as the appropriate sanction. The Court agreed and on November 21, 2006 entered an Order disbarring Respondent. |
