Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

964 A.2d 595

In re Daniel

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided February 5, 2009

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · decided 2009-02-05

Relies on Matter of Addams · In Re Devaney

Decided 2009-02-05

¶1ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2On consideration of the certified order of the Supreme Court of Colorado disbarring respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction, see People v. Daniel, No. 07PDJ026 (Colo. Mar. 17, 2008), this court’s January 7, 2008, order suspending respondent from the practice of law pending further action of the court and directing him to show cause why identical reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, and the report and recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility, to which no exceptions have been taken, and it appearing that respondent has failed to file either a response to this court’s order to show cause or the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

¶3ORDERED that Royal Daniel, III, is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. In re Addams, 579 A.2d 190, 191, 194 (D.C.1990)(en banc); accord, In re Devaney, 870 A.2d 53 (D.C.2005). It is

¶4FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement respondent’s disbarment will not begin to run until such time as he files an affidavit that fully complies with the requirements of D.C.Bar. R. XI, § 14(g)

/964/a2d/595 · .json · Public domain