When Elephants Fight…

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals will hear oral argument on April 9 in a bar discipline matter that will have (I believe) one unique feature – both Disciplinary Counsel and counsel for the Respondent are former chairs of the Board on Professional Responsibility.

In re William Wallace reviews a board report that proposes a 30-day suspension

we find that Respondent’s violation of Rule 1.16(d) requires a suspension and his intentionally false testimony and failure to acknowledge the wrongfulness of his conduct warrants an actual suspension instead of one stayed in favor of probation. As the Board recently explained in In re Wilson, Board Docket No. 15-BD-064, at 3 (BPR Jan. 17, 2019), these “are sufficiently aggravating to require that Respondent serve the thirty-day suspension.” But as the Court allowed in In re Avery, 189 A.3d 715, 721-22 (D.C. 2018) (per curiam) and the Board recommended in Wilson, we recommend that the 30-day period of suspension shall begin on a date Respondent selects and reports in advance to Disciplinary Counsel within ninety days after the Court’s suspension order, provided that he has by that date filed the affidavit required by D.C. Bar Rule XI, § 14(g).

Admission is free. (Mike Frisch)