From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Daniel

District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Feb 5, 2009
964 A.2d 595 (D.C. 2009)

Opinion

No. 07-BG-1271.

February 5, 2009.

Before KRAMER, Associate Judge, and BELSON and STEADMAN, Senior Judges.


ORDER


On consideration of the certified order of the Supreme Court of Colorado disbarring respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction, see People v. Daniel, No. 07PDJ026 (Colo. Mar. 17, 2008), this court's January 7, 2008, order suspending respondent from the practice of law pending further action of the court and directing him to show cause why identical reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, and the report and recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility, to which no exceptions have been taken, and it appearing that respondent has failed to file either a response to this court's order to show cause or the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

ORDERED that Royal Daniel, III, is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. In re Addams, 579 A.2d 190, 191, 194 (D.C. 1990) (en banc); accord, In re Devaney, 870 A.2d 53 (D.C. 2005). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement respondent's disbarment will not begin to run until such time as he files an affidavit that fully complies with the requirements of D.C.Bar. R. XI, § 14(g)


Summaries of

In re Daniel

District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Feb 5, 2009
964 A.2d 595 (D.C. 2009)
Case details for

In re Daniel

Case Details

Full title:In re Royal DANIEL, III, Respondent

Court:District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Date published: Feb 5, 2009

Citations

964 A.2d 595 (D.C. 2009)

Citing Cases

In re Shute

The burden is cast upon the bankrupt to overcome that presumption by a satisfactory explanation of the…

In re Lipp

Plainly he is entitled to be informed of the grounds on which his discharge is objected to, and to be heard…