Deliberate Indifference

An Ad Hoc District of Columbia Hearing Committee found that an attorney had engaged in misconduct in multiple matters in several jurisdictions, including places where she had not been admitted.

The committee concluded that

the persistent and intransigent nature of Respondent’s past misconduct strongly suggests that she will continue to engage in it. Admonished repeatedly by disciplinary authorities, she persisted in her misbehavior over the course of almost a decade. She continued to represent unsophisticated clients in North Carolina and Maryland despite knowing that she had no right to do so. She coupled that disdain with a deliberate indifference to the disciplinary process, in which she refused to participate despite the convenience of a Zoom hearing. She quite simply did not treat these proceedings seriously. Further, Respondent lives and works in North Carolina, and it seems clear that her conduct during suspension will be more difficult for disciplinary authorities in the District of Columbia to monitor. Finally, although we did not find that her conduct harmed Mr. Taylor, it was evident from evidence offered by the attorney from the North Carolina Innocence Project that Respondent was not competent to represent his interests.

Accordingly, we recommend that Respondent be sanctioned with a two-year suspension and that, before being permitted to resume the practice of law, she be required to demonstrate fitness to do so pursuant to D.C. Bar Rule XI, § 3(a)(2).

(Mike Frisch)