Default In D.C.

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals has issued a per curiam decision disbarring an attorney

The Board [on Professional Responsibility] recommended disbarment as a sanction for Mr. Green’s misconduct. We conclude that Mr. Green has forfeited his substantive exceptions to the Board’s assessment of his misconduct and that his procedural attack on his disciplinary proceeding has no merit. Accordingly, we have no reason to question the Board’s determination that Mr. Green committed multiple serious rule violations, and we agree with the Board that disbarment is the appropriate sanction.

Mr. Green argues to this court that he violated no Rules of Professional Conduct. But he failed to avail himself of the opportunity to make these arguments to the Board in the first instance. Indeed, even though the Board granted Mr. Green’s motion for additional time to file exceptions to the Ad Hoc Hearing Committee’s Report and Recommendation, he ultimately failed to present any arguments to the Board to persuade it that he had done no wrong.

One argument was preserved but rejected

 Mr. Green did make one procedural challenge before the Board to his disciplinary proceedings. In his motion to the Board for extra time to file exceptions, Mr. Green argued that his disciplinary case should be dismissed because the Ad Hoc Hearing Committee issued its report well outside of the 120-day timeframe envisioned by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9 (a)… Mr. Green never identified any prejudice in his motion to the Board (nor has he done so in his brief to this court). Thus the Board properly denied Mr. Green’s motion to dismiss.

 The court acted promptly here, imposing discipline 16 days after the matter was submitted.

Any petition for reinstatement must be preceded by payment of restitution to several clients.

As to delay, it appears that the hearing committee took a bit over a year to issue the report.

The case has a 2012 docket number, so the process of disbarment for multiple and largely uncontested misconduct took four years.  The charges were approved in March 2013.

Sad to say but that actually is this disciplinary system at its most efficient. (Mike Frisch)