Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

14 A.3d 1136

In Re Kaufman

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · decided 2011-03-10

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently January 2020

12 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2011-03-10

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM:

¶1 On November 12, 2010, the Board on Professional Responsibility (“Board”) found that Robert P. Kaufman, respondent, violated District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1(a), 1.3(a), 1.3(b)(1) & (2), 1.4(a) and 1.16(d), in connection with his intentional neglect of a client’s personal injury lawsuit. The Board adopted the recommendation of the ad hoc Hearing Committee that the court publicly censure respondent for his violations, after taking into account the intentional nature of the violation, the harm suffered by the client, respondent’s disciplinary history and mitigating circumstances (respondent’s mild depressive disorder, acknowledgment of wrongdoing and remorse, cooperation with Bar Counsel and compensation to the injured client). Pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9(h)(2), “if no exceptions are filed to the Board’s report, the court will enter an order imposing the discipline recommended by the Board upon the expiration of the time permitted for filing exceptions.” Neither Bar Counsel nor respondent filed an exception with the Board’s recommendation within the time allotted. See D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9(e). Accordingly, it is

¶2 ORDERED that Robert P. Kaufman is hereby publicly censured.

¶3 So ordered.

/14/a3d/1136 · .json · Public domain