In Re Stasson, 987 A.2d 1143 (D.C. 2010). · Go Syfert
Search
In Re Stasson, 987 A.2d 1143 (D.C. 2010). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: In Re Weekes (dc, 2010-03-11)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." In Re Weekes
D.C. · 2010 · signal: see also · confidence low
XI, § 11(c) mandates reciprocal discipline (“Reciprocal discipline shall be imposed”) except in certain limited situations. 1 As we have said previously: “In reciprocal discipline cases, the presumption is that the discipline in the District of Columbia will be the same as it was in the original disciplining jurisdiction.” In re Meisler, 776 A.2d 1207, 1207-08 (D.C.2001); see also In re Kennon, No. 09-BG-1327, 987 A.2d 1143 , 1143, 2010 D.C.App.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In Re Shelley A. STASSON, Respondent
09-BG-1327.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
Jan 28, 2010.
987 A.2d 1143
Reid, Schwelb, King.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

[*1144] ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the order of the Michigan Attorney Discipline Board suspending respondent for a period of four years, with reinstatement conditioned on respondent’s showing of fitness to practice law, and directing payment of restitution and costs, see Grievance Administrator, Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Stasson, no. 07-165-GA (March 20, 2009), this court’s November 18, 2009, order that suspended respondent from the practice of law pending action of the court and directed her to show cause why identical reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, the Statement of Bar Counsel recommending reciprocal and identical discipline be imposed, and it appearing that respondent has failed to respond or file the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

ORDERED that Shelley A. Stasson is hereby suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for a period of four years with reinstatement conditioned on proof of fitness. See e.g., In re Pelkey, 962 A.2d 268 (D.C.2008); In re Meaden, 902 A.2d 802 (D.C.2006). Reinstatement is also conditioned upon satisfaction of the conditions imposed in Michigan. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that, for purposes of reinstatement, respondent’s suspension will begin upon the filing of an affidavit in compliance with D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g).