Attorney discipline FY2026: 54 published dispositions of Maryland attorneys, listing the attorney name, action, and date of each entry (as published by the Attorney Grievance Commission)

保存されている情報

Published sanctions and actions affecting licensure for FY2026: ANTONACCI, Louis Bernardo - Suspension for one year and two days on June 18, 2025, nunc pro tunc to date of interim suspension imposed on May 27, 2026, in a reciprocal action from Virginia; BRENT, Duncan Kenner - Temporary Suspension on July 25, 2025, in a reciprocal action from …

Attorney discipline

ANTONACCI, Louis Bernardo - Suspension for one year and two days on June 18, 2025, nunc pro tunc to date of interim suspension imposed on May 27, 2026, in a reciprocal action from Virginia; BRENT, Duncan Kenner - Temporary Suspension on July 25, 2025, in a reciprocal action from Virginia and the District of Columbia, pending further Order from the Supreme Court of Maryland.; BROWN, Warren Anthony - Commission Reprimand on November 25, 2025; CAMERON, Justin Gregory - Commission Reprimand on January 27, 2026; CHEN, Le - Commission Reprimand on February 25, 2026; DEAN, Cendoria Yvonne - Indefinite Suspension by Consent on November 6, 2025, effective January 5, 2026; DUNBAR, Tilman, Jr. - Indefinite Suspension on April 24, 2026; EDELSTEIN, David Andrew - Disbarment by Consent on August 18, 2025, effective immediately; FINKE, Christopher Michael - Suspension for six months on April 24, 2026, stayed in favor of one year of probation with the terms contained in the Probation Agreement; GEPHARDT, Mary Ella - Suspension by Consent for ninety days on December 10, 2025, stayed in favor of one year of probation with the terms contained in the Revised Probation Agreement; GHAFOOR, Asim Abdur Rahman - Disbarment by Consent on March 31, 2026, effective immediately, following a Temporary Suspension on October 23, 2025, in a reciprocal action from the Department of Justice; GILLESPIE, Tristan Wade - Indefinite Suspension on November 21, 2025, effective immediately, with the right to petition for reinstatement after one year and after readmission to practice law in the district court, in a reciprocal action from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland; HAFFNER, Julian Arnold - Suspension for sixty days on March 20, 2026, to be followed by one year of probation, in a reciprocal action from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) for violations of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct. The Respondent entered into an agreement with a law firm in India that provided for payment for the Respondent to serve as attorney of record for trademark applications that the Indian law firm pre-prepared. The Respondent failed to adequately review trademark applications for which he served as attorney of record; failed to put proper procedures in place to ensure the Indian firm’s employees complied with USPTO signature requirements, which led to impermissibly signed trademark applications being filed with the USPTO; allowed the Indian firm’s employees to prepare and file trademark applications that bore his attorney credentials so as to appear that he had adequately reviewed the applications when he had not; sponsored prohibited persons for USPTO.gov support staff accounts; and failed to provide the Office of Enrollment and Discipline with copies of certain documents as requested.; HAMILTON, Judith Marie - Disbarred on January 27, 2026, effective immediately; HAMLIN, Sonya Nicole - Indefinite Suspension by Consent on August 20, 2025, effective immediately, with reinstatement conditioned on the completion of certain continuing legal education courses; HECHT, Spencer Michael - Disbarred on March 20, 2026, effective immediately; JOHNSON, Melanie Murray - Commission Reprimand on October 25, 2025, in a reciprocal action from the District of Columbia; JONES, Gregory Wayne - Temporary Suspension on December 18, 2025, effective immediately, pending further Order from the Supreme Court of Maryland, following a referral from the Maryland Child Support Administration regarding the Respondent’s child support arrearages. Upon a showing of compliance, the Respondent was reinstated to the practice of law on February 5, 2026.; JORGENSEN, Paul Victor - Commission Reprimand on November 25, 2025; KING, Marnitta Lanette - Indefinite Suspension on July 18, 2025, effective August 17, 2025, with the right to petition for reinstatement after six months conditioned on the Respondent’s agreement to a probationary period of not less than one year to include a practice monitor and other appropriate conditions; KING, Marnitta Lanette - Commission Reprimand on May 21, 2026; KOONTZ, Glen Franklin - Commission Reprimand on January 30, 2026, in a reciprocal action from Virginia; KOVSKY, David Solomon - Commission Reprimand on March 4, 2026; LARSON-JACKSON, Steve - Temporary Suspension on May 26, 2026, in a reciprocal action from the District of Columbia, pending further Order from the Supreme Court of Maryland.; LOPATTO, John S. - Disbarment by consent on June 18, 2026, effective immediately, in a reciprocal action from the District of Columbia; MARONICK, Thomas Joseph, Jr. - Commission Reprimand on September 22, 2025; McBRIDE, Camille Ramona - Commission Reprimand on September 22, 2025; McCOLLUM, James E., Jr. - Disbarment by Consent on July 31, 2025, effective immediately; MINTZ, David B. - Disbarred on September 4, 2025, effective immediately; MIORINI, Yahne Yvonne Denise - Commission Reprimand on June 1, 2026, in a reciprocal action from Virginia; MOORE, David Whitfield - Commission Reprimand on January 27, 2026; MOOREHEAD, Timothy Iryan, Jr. - Suspension by Consent for one year on June 18, 2026, stayed in favor of one year of probation with the terms contained in the Probation Agreement; MORALES, Julio Alberto - Commission Reprimand on June 4, 2026; MYERS, Scott Michael - Disbarment by Consent on March 20, 2026, effective immediately; NJOKU, Chukwuemeka A. - Suspension for sixty days on May 27, 2026, stayed in favor of one year of probation with the terms contained in the Probation Agreement; O’BRIEN, Brendan Michael - Suspension by Consent for thirty days on October 23, 2025, effective December 21, 2025; PATTON, Katherine Costain - Commission Reprimand on April 20, 2026; RADDATZ, Mark R. - Commission Reprimand on August 27, 2025, in a reciprocal action from the District of Columbia; REDMOND III, Leonard Clifford - Commission Reprimand on February 20, 2026; ROSS, Bryan S. - Indefinite Suspension by Consent on March 20, 2026, in a reciprocal action from the District of Columbia; ROUSE, Josephia Elease Georgetta - Indefinite Suspension by Consent on November 24, 2025, effective January 23, 2026; SCOFIELD, Susan Werner - Disbarment by consent on May 27, 2027, effective immediately; SOUTHERLAND, Janel Asheley - Revocation of probation for the Respondent’s non-compliance and Suspension for thirty days on April 8, 2026; TUCKER, Charles T., Jr. - Suspension for six months on February 20, 2026, effective March 23, 2026, in a reciprocal action from Virginia; TUCKER, Charles T., Jr. - Disbarment by Consent on June 17, 2026, effective immediately; WAGNER, Brenda Carol - Reprimand on February 20, 2026, in a reciprocal action from the District of Columbia; BROWN, Warren Anthony - Commission Reprimand on November 25, 2025; CHEN, Le - Commission Reprimand on February 25, 2026; HECHT, Spencer Michael - Disbarred on March 20, 2026, effective immediately; JONES, Gregory Wayne - Temporary Suspension on December 18, 2025, effective immediately, pending further Order from the Supreme Court of Maryland, following a referral from the Maryland Child Support Administration regarding the Respondent’s child support arrearages.; KOVSKY, David Solomon - Commission Reprimand on March 4, 2026; MOOREHEAD, Timothy Iryan, Jr. - Suspension by Consent for one year on June 18, 2026, stayed in favor of one year of probation with the terms contained in the Probation Agreement; MORALES, Julio Alberto - Commission Reprimand on June 4, 2026; MYERS, Scott Michael - Disbarment by Consent on March 20, 2026, effective immediately (as published)

Reason and background for the action

ANTONACCI, Louis Bernardo: filing a meritless lawsuit against his former client and disclosing confidential client information in the lawsuit.; BROWN, Warren Anthony: failing to represent his clients competently, failing to adequately communicate with his clients, collecting unreasonable fees, and failing to take steps to protect his clients’ interests upon termination of the representation. The Respondent’s retainer agreements included language that his flat fee was “fully earned upon receipt.” In a criminal case, the Respondent did not keep records of his visits to see his client in jail, documentation of hours worked on the case, or notes reflecting the nature and extent of work performed.; CAMERON, Justin Gregory: failing to represent his clients competently and diligently and failing to comply with attorney trust account record-keeping, monthly reconciliation, and prohibited transaction requirements. The Respondent overdrew his attorney trust account three times and performed reconciliations “periodically” instead of monthly. A review of the Respondent’s law firm ledgers revealed discrepancies in payments into and out of the attorney trust account.; CHEN, Le: failing to adequately communicate with his client and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. In an immigration matter, the Respondent failed to respond to his client’s communication attempts and had in fact blocked her telephone number and blacklisted her on the WeChat application. The Respondent falsely advised the client that he had contacted the immigration court and that the client did not need to appear for a hearing, when the Respondent had in fact relied on information from his client’s former counsel’s paralegal. When the client failed to appear at the hearing, the Immigration Judge signed a deportation order.; DEAN, Cendoria Yvonne: failing to represent her clients competently, failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account, failing to promptly deliver funds that a third party was entitled to receive, and failing to comply with attorney trust account prohibited transaction requirements. The Respondent overdrew her attorney trust account. In her personal injury practice, the Respondent referred many of her clients to a particular doctor for treatment, and a review of the Respondent’s attorney trust account and related client ledgers revealed numerous failures of the Respondent to pay the doctor his fees in a timely manner after receiving her clients’ settlement checks.; DUNBAR, Tilman, Jr.: failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account and failing to comply with attorney trust account record-keeping. The Respondent overdrew his trust account. The Respondent did not conduct monthly reconciliations. A review of his records showed that he improperly used funds from current client settlements to satisfy obligations owed to a previous client and that he disbursed attorney’s fees from settlement proceeds before properly paying clients and medical providers.; EDELSTEIN, David Andrew: committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on his honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as an attorney; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. The Respondent pled guilty to two counts of possession of child pornography.; FINKE, Christopher Michael: failing to represent his clients competently and diligently; failing to adequately communicate with clients; failing to reasonably expedite litigation; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.; GEPHARDT, Mary Ella: failing to represent her clients competently and diligently, failing to adequately communicate with her clients, and failing to communicate to her clients the scope of the representation and the basis or rate of the fee and expenses for which her clients would be responsible before or within a reasonable time after commencing the representation. In a matter where the Respondent was hired to file a petition to modify child support, the Respondent failed to ever file the petition she drafted and failed to convey the status of the petition to her client. In a matter where the Respondent was hired to settle an estate, the Respdonent completed a required real property sale and received settlement funds but failed to remit the funds to her client for approximately four months.; GHAFOOR, Asim Abdur Rahman: committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on his honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as an attorney; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, the Respondent pled guilty to one count of filing a false tax return.; GILLESPIE, Tristan Wade: failing to maintain candor to the tribunal, failing to maintain fairness to opposing parties and counsel, and knowingly making a false statement of material fact or law to a third person or failing to disclose a material fact when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by a client. The Respondent’s misconduct involved repeated instances of dishonesty to tribunals in hundreds of cases.; HAMILTON, Judith Marie: failing to represent her client competently and diligently, failing to adequately communicate with her client, collecting unreasonable fees, failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account, failing to take steps to protect her client’s interest upon termination of the representation, knowingly failing to respond to Bar Counsel, and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. The Respondent’s misconduct arose from her representation of a client in his divorce proceedings and from her lack of cooperation in Bar Counsel’s subsequent investigation into her conduct.; HAMLIN, Sonya Nicole: failing to represent her client competently and diligently; failing to communicate to her client the scope of the representation and the basis or rate of the fee and expenses for which her client would be responsible before or within a reasonable time after commencing the representation; failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account; failing to comply with attorney trust account record-keeping and monthly reconciliation requirements; failing to take steps to protect her client’s interest upon termination of the representation; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and using trust money for purposes other than the purpose for which the money is entrusted. The Respondent deposited unearned fees into her personal bank account and used unearned fees to pay her office rent and other expenses. The Respondent failed to keep any type of record of hours worked on her client’s case and had no written agreement to define the agreed scope of representation or when any portion of the fee would be considered earned, both when the Respondent was initially retained and when the Respondent and her client decided to change the scope, goals, and total fee for the representation.; HECHT, Spencer Michael: failing to represent his clients competently and diligently; failing to adequately communicate with his clients; collecting unreasonable fees; failing to uphold his duty to a former client; failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account; failing to take steps to protect his clients’ interests upon termination of the representation; knowingly failing to disclose facts to Bar Counsel necessary to correct a misapprehension; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. The Respondent, among other misconduct, lost his client’s signed post-nuptial agreement, concealed from the client the fact that he lost the document, and refused to issue a timely refund for the cost of preparation of the document. The Respondent misrepresented to another client that he was filing a motion that he had no intention of filing, filed an expert witness designation falsely stating that the expert was preparing a report in the client’s case when he knew that the expert was not, and signed an affidavit for opposing counsel that was harmful to his then-former client. In addition, the Respondent made an unauthorized charge on another client’s credit card.; JOHNSON, Melanie Murray: failing to abide by the scope of representation, failing to consult with the client as to the means by which the objectives of the representation were to be pursued, failing to represent her client diligently, failing to adequately communicate with her client, and failing to explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions about the representation. The Respondent’s misconduct arose from her representation of a client who sought assistance in resolving overdue condominium fees.; JORGENSEN, Paul Victor: committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on his honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as an attorney. The Respondent pled guilty to one count of assault in the second degree and accepted probation before judgment.; KING, Marnitta Lanette: failing to represent her clients competently and diligently, failing to adequately communicate with her clients, collecting unreasonable fees, failing to recognize a conflict of interest, failing to safekeep unearned fees in an attorney trust account, failing to withdraw from representing her client when continued representation would result in violation of the Maryland Attorneys’ Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly failing to respond to Bar Counsel, and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. The Respondent failed to keep her clients reasonably informed about the status of their cases; failed to perform meaningful legal services in furtherance of their cases; improperly collected a flat fee; failed to recognize a conflict of interest and contributed to that conflict by filing suit against a client; and failed to comply with Bar Counsel’s investigations.; KING, Marnitta Lanette: failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account and failing to comply with attorney trust account prohibited transaction requirements. The Respondent overdrew her attorney trust account, which she described as an administrative error. The Respondent’s employee processed a refund to a client who was not entitled to receive it. Upon learning of the overdraft, the Respondent replenished the trust account to bring it current and reversed the erroneous transaction.; KOONTZ, Glen Franklin: failing to communicate to his client the scope of the representation and the basis or rate of the fee and expenses for which his client would be responsible before or within a reasonable time after commencing the representation. The Respondent failed to explain his legal fees to his client in a divorce matter within a reasonable time after undertaking the representation when he did not regularly represent the client.; KOVSKY, David Solomon: failing to represent his client competently, failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account, failing to properly supervise attorneys, and practicing law in a jurisdiction in violation of the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction. The Respondent, a Pennsylvania attorney, filed an estate matter in Montgomery County and was appointed as one of two Co-Personal Representatives. Three months later, the Respondent became the sole Personal Representative upon the other’s resignation. Despite his significant experience with estate and trust matters, the Respondent was not a member of the Maryland Bar, lacked experience with Maryland probate, failed to adequately familiarize himself with Maryland law, and failed to retain or associate with an experienced Maryland probate attorney to represent him in the estate matter. The Respondent assigned work to and supervised an associate in his law firm who also was not admitted to practice law in Maryland. These failures led to the Respondent using estate funds to pay attorneys’ fees and commissions without first obtaining consent or court approval. Upon learning of his error, however, the Respondent took remedial action.; LOPATTO, John S.: engaging in reckless misappropriation of entrusted funds.; MARONICK, Thomas Joseph, Jr.: failing to represent his clients competently and diligently; failing to abide by the scope of the representation; failing to adequately communicate with his clients; failing to recognize a conflict of interest; failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account; failing to make required deposits in an attorney trust account; failing to comply with attorney trust account record-keeping, monthly reconciliation, and prohibited transaction requirements; failing to properly supervise attorneys and a non-attorney assistant; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. In a personal injury action, the Respondent assigned an attorney associated with his firm as “of counsel” to his client’s case. The Respondent failed to adequately supervise the attorney, who failed to timely respond to discovery, failed to respond to motions, failed to adequately communicate with the client, failed to timely identify experts, and failed to appear for a properly noted deposition, resulting in sanctions being entered against the client. When the Respondent became aware of the attorney’s errors in the case, the Respondent failed to competently and diligently correct or ameliorate the errors. In a criminal matter, the Respondent was unavailable on his client’s trial date and asked another attorney associated with the firm as “of counsel” to appear to request a postponement or plead a jury trial. The Respondent failed to advise his client that he was unavailable for the trial date or that another attorney would be appearing that day to request a postponement. As a result, his client insisted on proceeding to trial that day, the attorney was unprepared for trial, and the Court found the client guilty. Despite advising his client that the firm would file an appeal on his behalf, neither the Respondent nor the subordinate attorney filed a timely notice of appeal. The Respondent never advised his client that he might have a viable post-conviction claim of ineffective assistance of counsel and never advised his client that he had a conflict of interest in continuing to represent him after he and the subordinate attorney failed to adequately prepare for trial or file a timely notice of appeal. In addition, between 2015 and 2019, the Respondent failed to maintain adequate records for the receipt, maintenance, and disbursement of client funds. During this time, a non-lawyer firm employee authorized to receive client payments diverted a portion of funds paid by clients to her own personal bank account. Due to the Respondent's failure to adequately supervise this employee, coupled with his inadequate record- keeping, the employee was able to steal between $50,000.00 and $100,000.00 in client funds. A reconciliation of the Respondent's attorney trust account revealed an approximate discrepancy of $123,000.00, and the attorney trust account could not be fully reconciled due to the Respondent's mismanagement of the account and poor record-keeping.; McBRIDE, Camille Ramona: failing to represent her client competently and diligently; failing to abide by the scope of the representation; failing to adequately communicate with her client; failing to take steps to protect her client’s interest upon termination of the representation; filing frivolous pleadings; failing to reasonably expedite litigation; knowingly failing to fully respond to Bar Counsel; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. The Respondent failed to review court files associated with her client’s prior family law cases, which resulted in the Respondent making incorrect statements in the complaint for absolute divorce and child access that she filed on behalf of her client. The Respondent’s failure to review the status of the prior cases also prevented her from accurately advising the court and responding to the opposing party’s assertions during trial. After the Respondent relocated to Florida, the Respondent failed to communicate with her client regarding her intention to terminate the representation and failed to withdraw her appearance in the case. The Respondent failed to appear for two remote pretrial conferences in the case and could not be reached by the court or her client. In addition, the Respondent failed to timely file tax returns and failed to pay income taxes over a period of several years.; McCOLLUM, James E., Jr.: committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on his honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as an attorney; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. In the U.S. District Court for District of Maryland, the Respondent pled guilty to one count of willful failure to pay taxes in violation of Title 26, U.S. Code, Section 7202. Over the course of twenty-four years, the Respondent failed to timely pay over two million dollars in employment taxes withheld from the employees of his law firm. The Respondent also failed to timely file his own individual income tax returns for 2020 through 2023 and failed to pay the federal government over $220,515.00 owed for 2020 through 2022.; MINTZ, David B.: failing to represent his clients competently and diligently; failing to adequately communicate with his clients; collecting unreasonable fees; failing to withdraw from representing his clients when his physical or mental condition materially impaired his ability to represent the clients; failing to reasonably expedite litigation; knowingly disobeying obligations under the rules of a tribunal; knowingly failing to respond to Bar Counsel; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. The violations occurred in connection with the Respondent’s representation of fourteen clients in matters arising in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland, as well as his personal bankruptcy filings and his failure to pay state and federal taxes.; MIORINI, Yahne Yvonne Denise: failing to represent her client diligently; collecting unreasonable fees; failing to communicate to her client the basis or rate of the fee and expenses for which her client would be responsible before or within a reasonable time after commencing the representation; failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account; and failing to comply with attorney trust account record-keeping. The Respondent charged a “nonrefundable” and “minimum” fee. The Respondent provided the client with an inherently contradictory fee agreement that did not adequately explain the fee that she intended to charge. The Respondent failed to deposit unearned legal fees into her operating account and failed to provide the client with any accountings for the advanced fee paid during representation. The Respondent disbursed the client’s legal fee before it was earned.; MOORE, David Whitfield: representing clients involving a conflict of interest. A woman hired the Respondent to represent her boyfriend in two criminal matters. Soon thereafter, the woman was arrested and charged with assaulting her boyfriend; she also filed a criminal complaint alleging that her boyfriend had assaulted her. Upon her request, the Respondent agreed to represent her with respect to her own criminal charges but only as far as the preliminary hearing. The Respondent subsequently entered his appearance in one of the boyfriend’s criminal cases.; MOOREHEAD, Timothy Iryan, Jr.: failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account; making false statements in connection with a disciplinary matter; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. The Respondent admitted to handling settlement funds without maintaining a trust account.; MORALES, Julio Alberto: failing to represent his client competently and diligently, failing to adequately communicate with his client, attempting to settle a potential claim of liability with a client, failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account, failing to make required deposits in an attorney trust account, and failing to comply with attorney trust account record-keeping. The Respondent failed to place any portion of the retainer funds into an attorney trust account. The Respondent failed to provide discovery responses to opposing counsel by the deadline. After opposing counsel filed a Motion to Compel Discovery and for Attorney Fees, the Respondent failed to respond to the motion or provide the requested discovery. The judge granted the motion, ordered the answers to be produced within seven days, and warned of sanctions for non-compliance. The Respondent still failed to produce discovery answers. The Respondent did not inform his client of what was occurring until after the fact. The Respondent refunded his client the entire retainer and an additional $1,029.00.; MYERS, Scott Michael: failing to adequately communicate with his clients; knowingly failing to respond to Bar Counsel; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. The Respondent’s office was retained in ongoing construction-related litigation, and the Respondent was solely responsible for communicating with the clients, handling discovery, and appearing in court for hearings on the matter. Discovery disputes developed, and a hearing was held on the clients’ discovery violations. Although the Respondent attended the hearing, he did not advise his clients of the hearing or, during the hearing, attempt to secure their appearance or communicate with them. Later, a settlement conference was held, and although the Respondent attended the hearing, he similarly did not advise his clients of the hearing or, during the conference, attempt to secure their appearance or communicate with them. The court dismissed the clients’ case due to their unexplained absences and continued failure to comply with discovery orders. The Respondent failed to advise his clients that the case had been dismissed and actively concealed the dismissal from his senior partner.; NJOKU, Chukwuemeka A.: providing financial assistance for non-litigation expenses to a client in connection with a pending matter, failing to recognize a conflict of interest, and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. Prior to settlement, the Respondent referred clients to a lending company for an advance on settlements, and if requested, he would assist clients in completing the loan information and email the information to the lending company. Where a client requested additional funds, the Respondent wrote a check directly to the client from his operating account with a title in the memo that read, “Loan no interest.”; O’BRIEN, Brendan Michael: committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on his honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as an attorney. The Respondent pled guilty to one count of assault in the second degree.; PATTON, Katherine Costain: failing to represent her client competently and diligently, failing to adequately communicate with her client, and failing to take steps to protect her client’s interests upon termination of representation. A client retained the Respondent in an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) related matter. At the time, the client was in active negotiation with her employer over an EEOC charge for which probable cause had been found and a Right to Sue letter was expected to be issued. During negotiations, the Respondent failed to follow up with opposing counsel regarding a counteroffer after rejecting counsel’s offer. The client contacted the Respondent’s office several times requesting an update, and the Respondent failed to communicate with her client. When the client was finally able to speak with the Respondent, she was informed that the Respondent had not contacted the EEOC and was still unaware that the Right to Sue letter had been issued and since expired. When the client communicated her intent to file a complaint against the Respondent’s firm, the firm ceased all communication with her and abandoned the representation. The Respondent did not issue a notice of termination of representation, did not investigate why she did not receive notice of issuance of the Right to Sue letter, and did not discuss with her client the legal implications of the expiration of the ninety-day Right to Sue deadline and any remedies she may have.; RADDATZ, Mark R.: violating the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct in communicating about the subject of representation with a person known to be represented by counsel and engaging in conduct that seriously interferes with the administration of justice. The Respondent received an informal admonition in the District of Columbia for communicating with a represented party without the party’s counsel’s consent and for filing an amended settlement agreement without proper notice. Thereafter, the Respondent failed to report the discipline to Bar Counsel.; REDMOND III, Leonard Clifford: failing to represent his client competently and diligently. The Respondent made a variety of errors while administering an estate. He lacked the legal knowledge, experience, and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation and did nothing to improve his competency.; ROSS, Bryan S.: engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. In connection with multiple bankruptcy cases in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia, the Respondent made misrepresentations to the courts and seriously interfered with the administration of justice.; ROUSE, Josephia Elease Georgetta: representing a client involving a conflict of interest, failing to safekeep funds and make required deposits in an attorney trust account, representing a client with interests materially adverse to those of a prospective client in the same or a substantially related matter after receiving information from the prospective client that could be significantly harmful to that person in the matter, commingling funds, failing to comply with attorney trust account prohibited transaction requirements, and using trust money for purposes other than the purpose for which the money is entrusted. The Respondent agreed to represent a client in a divorce action where the Respondent had previously conducted an initial consultation with the opposing party and where the Respondent had failed to obtain any waiver(s) of the potential conflict. After the Respondent’s paralegal identified the potential conflict and informed the client, the Respondent made a cash withdrawal from her attorney trust account to provide her client with a refund. The client returned a portion of the cash to the Respondent so that the Respondent’s firm, via an associate, would continue to represent her. The returned funds were never appropriately deposited in trust. In addition, seven improper transactions occurred on the Respondent’s attorney trust account due to the account’s unintentional connection to the Respondent’s mobile payment applications.; SCOFIELD, Susan Werner: failing to represent sixteen of her clients competently and diligently; failing to adequately communicate with clients; failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account; failing to take steps to protect her clients’ interests upon termination of the representation; failing to reasonably expedite litigation; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.; SOUTHERLAND, Janel Asheley: failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account and failing to comply with attorney trust account record-keeping.; TUCKER, Charles T., Jr.: failing to adequately communicate with his client, knowingly making false statements in connection with a disciplinary matter, and committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on his honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as an attorney. While representing a client in Virginia federal court, the Respondent failed to explain the terms and conditions of his client’s employment discrimination settlement agreement to the extent reasonably necessary for his client to make an informed decision about accepting the settlement. The Respondent also made knowingly false statements to a Virginia State Bar investigator.; TUCKER, Charles T., Jr.: failing to represent his clients competently and diligently; failing to communicate to his clients the scope of the representation and the basis or rate of the fee and expenses for which his clients would be responsible before or within a reasonable time after commencing the representation; failing to adequately communicate with his client; failing to maintain candor to the tribunal; failing to take steps to protect his client’s interest upon termination of the representation; knowingly failing to respond to Bar Counsel; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice; and failing to comply with the Supreme Court of Maryland’s suspension order, effective March 23, 2026.; WAGNER, Brenda Carol: communicating about the subject of representation with a person known to be represented by counsel. The Respondent knowingly contacted a represented individual on two occasions, even though she was aware that he was represented by counsel at that time and without the consent of his counsel.; BROWN, Warren Anthony: failing to represent his clients competently, failing to adequately communicate with his clients, collecting unreasonable fees, and failing to take steps to protect his clients’ interests upon termination of the representation. The Respondent’s retainer agreements included language that his flat fee was “fully earned upon receipt.” In a criminal case, the Respondent did not keep records of his visits to the jail to visit his client, documentation of hours worked on the case, or notes reflecting the nature and extent of work performed.; CHEN, Le: failing to adequately communicate with his client and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. In an immigration matter, the Respondent failed to respond to his client’s communication attempts and had in fact blocked her telephone number and blacklisted her on the WeChat app. The Respondent falsely advised the client that he had contacted the immigration court and that the client did not need to appear for a hearing, when the Respondent had in fact relied on information from his client’s former counsel’s paralegal. When the client failed to appear at the hearing, the Immigration Judge signed a deportation order.; HECHT, Spencer Michael: failing to represent his clients competently and diligently; failing to adequately communicate with his clients, collecting unreasonable fees; failing to uphold his duty to a former client; failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account; failing to take steps to protect his clients’ interests upon termination of the representation; knowingly failing to disclose facts to Bar Counsel necessary to correct a misapprehension; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. The Respondent, among other misconduct, lost his client’s signed post-nuptial agreement, concealed from the client the fact that he lost the document, and refused to issue a timely refund for the cost of preparation of the document. The Respondent misrepresented to another client that he was filing a motion that he had no intention of filing, filed an expert witness designation falsely stating that the expert was preparing a report in the client’s case when he knew that the expert was not, and signed an affidavit for opposing counsel that was harmful to his then-former client. In addition, the Respondent made an unauthorized charge on another client’s credit card.; KOVSKY, David Solomon: failing to represent his client competently, failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account, failing to properly supervise attorneys, and practicing law in a jurisdiction in violation of the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction. The Respondent, a Pennsylvania attorney, filed an estate matter in Montgomery County and was appointed as one of two Co-Personal Representatives. Three months later, the Respondent became the sole Personal Representative upon the other’s resignation. Despite his significant experience with estate and trust matters, the Respondent was not a member of the Maryland Bar, lacked experience with Maryland probates, failed to adequately familiarize himself with Maryland law, and failed to retain or associate with an experienced Maryland probate attorney to represent him in the estate matter. The Respondent assigned work to and supervised an associate in his law firm who also was not admitted to practice law in Maryland. These failures led to the Respondent using estate funds to pay attorneys’ fees and commissions without first obtaining consent or court approval. Upon learning of his error, however, the Respondent took remedial action.; MOOREHEAD, Timothy Iryan, Jr.: failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account; making false statements to in connection with a disciplinary matter; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. The Respondent admitted to handling settlement funds without maintaining a trust account.; MORALES, Julio Alberto: failing to represent his client competently and diligently, failing to adequately communicate with his client, attempting to settle a potential claim of liability with a client, failing to safekeep funds in an attorney trust account, failing to make required deposits in an attorney trust account, and failing to comply with attorney trust account record-keeping. The Respondent failed to place any portion of the retainer funds into an attorney trust account. The Respondent failed to provide discovery responses to opposing counsel by the deadline. After opposing counsel filed a Motion to Compel Discovery and for Attorney Fees, the Respondent failed to respond to the motion or provide the requested discovery. The judge granted the motion, ordered the answers to be produced within seven days, and warned of sanctions for non-compliance. The Respondent still failed to produce discovery answers. The Respondent did not inform his client of what was occurring until after the fact. The Respondent refunded his client the entire retainer and an additional $1,029.00, which the client requested as an inconvenience fee.; MYERS, Scott Michael: failing to adequately communicate with his clients; knowingly failing to respond to Bar Counsel; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. The Respondent’s office was retained in ongoing construction-related litigation, and the Respondent was solely responsible for communicating with the clients, handling discovery, and appearing in court for hearings on the matter. Discovery disputes developed, and a hearing was held on the clients’ discovery violations. Although the Respondent attended the hearing, he did not advise his clients of the hearing or, during the hearing, attempt to secure their appearance or communicate with them. Later, a settlement conference was held, and although the Respondent attended the hearing, he similarly did not advise his clients of the hearing or, during the conference, attempt to secure their appearance or communicate with them. The court dismissed the clients’ case due to their unexplained absences and continued failure to comply with discovery orders. The Respondent failed to advise both his clients and his senior partner that the clients’ case had been dismissed. (as published)

原データ更新日：2026-10-17
保存版に記録された日付です。今回の実装・デプロイ日ではありません。

出典・情報の根拠

• https://www.mdcourts.gov/attygrievance/sanctions ↗