Bar Counsel wanted to suspend him. The Court wanted him to continue serving his community where "his pro bono legal service and his other volunteer efforts have been exceptional."
Issue: What sanction should the Court impose upon an attorney who made mistakes in administering a small estate and failed to properly manage his attorney trust account?
Holding: While the Court ordinarily orders some form of suspension in cases like this, mitigating factors in this case warrant the lesser sanction of a reprimand where the lawyer did not act with a dishonest or selfish motive, expressed significant remorse for his errors, was fully cooperative, did not impede the investigation in any way, and had an exceptional history of contributions to the community through his pro bono legal service and other volunteer efforts.
Alleged Violations: Maryland Attorneys' Rules of Professional Conduct 19-301.1, 19-301.3, 19-301.4(a)(2) and (3), 19-301.15(a) and (c), 19-308.4(a) and (d), and Maryland Rule 19-407(a)(3).
Argued: May 10, 2021
Decided: August 27, 2021
|By The Lawyer's Lawyers | Kramer & Connolly and Irwin R. Kramer who are responsible for the content of this informational website.||This website is designed for lawyers faced with attorney grievances. As cases do differ, past performance does not guarantee future results.|
NOT AFFILIATED WITH THE ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND