Attorney Grievance Commission v. Cafferty

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that disbarment is not appropriate where the violation is the result of negligence, not intentional acts
• stating that when a sister state’s purpose in disciplining attorneys is the same as Maryland’s, we will defer
• holding that like the attorney in Gallagher, who “was disbarred for his unmiti gated and intentional misappropriation of client funds,” “[likewise, Ms. Cafferty intentionally and consistently depleted the funds in the Riggs Escrow Account without the permission of the condominium owners”
• stating that “[w]e tend to, but are not required to, impose the same sanction”
• stating that the D.C. Court “ ‘adhere[s] to a standard of presumptive disbarment,’ except in cases of negligent misappropriation or extraordinary circumstances”
• stating that ‘[w]e tend to, but are not required to, impose the same sanction’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).