Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

In Re Washington, 489 A.2d 452 (1985)

Citation
In Re Washington, 489 A.2d 452 (1985)
Parent Document
In Re Washington, 489 A.2d 452 (1985)
Jurisdiction
DC (municipal)
Effective Date
1985-02-28

Other Sections in This Document (119)

Full Text

929 chars
Finally, we pause briefly to note Respondent’s argument that he did not really act as Ms. Nesbitt’s attorney at all. The argument does not survive a moment’s scrutiny. Respondent affirmatively represented in the letter that he wrote to the landlord that he had been retained by Ms. Nesbitt. He prepared a complaint and filed it on her behalf. He put his address and telephone number on the complaint in a way that could only have led a reasonable reader to conclude that he was acting as Ms. Nes-bitt’s attorney. He advised her to seek a continuance or to consult another attorney when he was unable to attend court. Finally, as the Hearing Committee rightfully emphasizes, Ms. Nesbitt had a clear expectation that Respondent was acting as her lawyer. In the face of this overwhelming evidence, we reject Respondent’s argument as frivolous, as did the Hearing Committee. III. Conduct Prejudicial to the Administration of Justice.