In re Salo

Summary

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals considers reciprocal discipline imposed on Frederick W. Salo after New York suspended him for nonvenal misappropriation and related trust-account violations. The court holds that Salo rebutted the presumption favoring identical reciprocal discipline because the misconduct was comparable to negligent misappropriation under District of Columbia standards. It imposes a six-month suspension without a fitness requirement.

Holdings

1. Salo rebutted the presumption favoring identical reciprocal discipline because the misconduct warranted substantially different discipline in the District of Columbia under D.C. Bar Rule XI § 11(c)(4).
2. For purposes of reciprocal discipline, Salo's conduct was properly treated as negligent misappropriation rather than reckless or intentional misappropriation.
3. The six-month suspension did not require proof of fitness as a condition of reinstatement.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Salo rebutted the presumption that the District of Columbia should impose discipline identical to the discipline imposed by New York.
2. Whether the New York findings were most appropriately characterized under District of Columbia standards as negligent rather than reckless or intentional misappropriation.
3. Whether the difference between New York's one-year suspension with a fitness requirement and the District of Columbia's usual sanction for negligent misappropriation was substantial.
4. Whether Salo's District of Columbia suspension should include a fitness requirement.

Disposition

other