Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

66 A.3d 1020

In re Carter

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · decided 2013-05-30

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently August 2020

8 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2013-05-30

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2On consideration of the affidavit of Karl W. Carter Jr., wherein he consents to disbarment from the Bar of the District of Columbia pursuant to § 12 of Rule XI of the Rules Governing the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, which affidavit has been filed with the Clerk of this Court, and the report and recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility, it is this 30th day of May 2013

¶3ORDERED that the said Karl W. Carter Jr. is hereby disbarred by consent, effective forthwith. The effective date of respondent’s disbarment shall run, for reinstatement purposes, from the date respondent files his affidavit pursuant to D.C. Bar Rule XI, § 14(g).

¶4The Clerk shall publish this order, but the affidavit shall not be publicly disclosed or otherwise made available except upon order of the court or upon written consent of the respondent.

¶5*1021The Clerk shall cause a copy of this order to be transmitted to the Chairman of the Board on Professional Responsibility and to the respondent, thereby giving him notice of the provisions of Rule XI, §§ 14 and 16, which set forth certain rights and responsibilities of disbarred attorneys and the effect of failure to comply therewith.

/66/a3d/1020 · .json · Public domain