Skip to main content

In Re Anderson

Citations

  • 778 A.2d 330
  • 2001 D.C. App. LEXIS 154
  • 2001 WL 867430

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that 10 reckless misappropriation exists where there is “indiscriminate commingling of entrusted and personal funds”
  • reaching that conclusion in a case where the credibility determination was based on rejection of the respondent's testimony as \self-serving\ (\because testimony by a respondent in explanation of his conduct is almost by definition self-serving\
  • noting general rule that \the burden of proving the disciplinary charges rests with [Disciplinary] Counsel\
  • reckless misappropriation may be shown by proof of “a pattern or course of conduct demonstrating an unacceptable disregard for the welfare of entrusted funds”
  • where respondent’s misappropriation of funds was not reckless, no presumption of disbarment
  • disbarment appropriate when attorney showed a disregard of entrusted funds

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Farrell, Glickman, Washington

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

78 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

25 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.