Summary
The District of Columbia Court of Appeals imposed reciprocal disbarment on Jodie Grossman after Massachusetts indefinitely suspended her for intentional misappropriation of client funds, inadequate accounting, fabricated evidence, and misrepresentations to bar counsel. The court adopted the Board on Professional Responsibility's recommendation and ordered that the period for purposes of reinstatement begin when Grossman files the required affidavit.
Holdings
- The court may impose substantially different reciprocal discipline when the misconduct, if committed in the District of Columbia, would warrant a materially different sanction and the record supports the underlying misconduct and due process.
- Intentional misappropriation of client funds warrants disbarment in the District of Columbia.
Questions Presented
- Whether substantially different reciprocal discipline should be imposed in the District of Columbia after Massachusetts indefinitely suspended Grossman for intentional misappropriation and related misconduct.
- Whether the appropriate District of Columbia discipline for the misconduct would be disbarment rather than suspension.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (9)
- In re DeMaio, 893 A.2d 583, 587 (D.C. 2006)(followed)
- In re Garner, 576 A.2d 1356, 1357 (D.C. 1990)(followed)
- In re Carlson, 802 A.2d 341, 348 (D.C. 2002)(followed)
- In re Addams, 579 A.2d 190, 191 (D.C. 1990) (en banc)(followed)
- In re Delaney, 697 A.2d 1212, 1214 (D.C. 1997)(followed)
- In re Goldsborough, 654 A.2d 1285, 1287-88 (D.C. 1995)(followed)
- In re Slosberg, 650 A.2d 1329, 1331-33 (D.C. 1994)(followed)
- In re Steele, 914 A.2d 679 (D.C. 2007)(followed)
- In re Bell, 716 A.2d 205 (D.C. 1998)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…