Washington Lawyer - March/April 2021 - 46

DISCIPLINARY SUMMARIES

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Disciplinary Actions Taken by the
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Original Matters
In re Harold L. Boyd III. Bar No. 481736.
October 1, 2020. The D.C. Court of Appeals
granted Boyd's petition for reinstatement.
In re Jacqueline J. Moore. Bar No. 228908.
November 25, 2020. The D.C. Court of
Appeals disbarred Moore by consent.
In re Jeffrey M. Sherman. Bar No. 348896.
November 25, 2020. The D.C. Court of
Appeals disbarred Sherman by consent.
Interim Suspensions Issued by the
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
In re Anitha W. Johnson. Bar No. 495672.
November 25, 2020. Johnson was suspended
on an interim basis pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI,
§ 9(g), pending final action on the Board on
Professional Responsibility's October 13, 2020,
recommendation of disbarment.
In re Deni-Antionette Mazingo-Mayronne. Bar
No. 479656. November 25, 2020. MazingoMayronne was suspended on an interim basis
pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9(g), pending
final action on the Board on Professional
Responsibility's October 13, 2020, recommendation of disbarment.
In re Jason Lee Van Dyke. Bar No. 1027245.
November 18, 2020. Van Dyke was suspended on an interim basis based upon discipline imposed in the District Court of Wise
County, Texas.
Informal Admonitions Issued by the
Office of Disciplinary Counsel
In re Samer B. Korkor. Bar No. 989381. October
28, 2020. Disciplinary Counsel issued Korkor
an informal admonition for representing a
corporation in defense to a Department of
Justice (DOJ) antitrust investigation and later
working for the DOJ on that same investigation and legal dispute in violation of Rule 1.9.

Disciplinary Actions Taken by the Board
on Professional Responsibility Hearing
Committees on Negotiated Discipline
In re Allison C. Diercks. Bar No. 208762.
November 9, 2020. The Board on Professional
Responsibility's Hearing Committee Number
Four recommended that the D.C. Court of
Appeals accept Diercks's petition for negotiated discipline and suspend her for 18
months with fitness for violations of Rules
1.3(b)(2), 1.6(a), and 8.4(c).
Disciplinary Actions Taken by the Board
on Professional Responsibility
Original Matters
In re Alvin S. Brown. Bar No. 263681. October 7,
2020. The Board on Professional Responsibility
recommended that the D.C. Court of Appeals
suspend Brown for 60 days with the requirements that he pay the client $4,000 in restitution (plus 6 percent interest since January 9,
2019) and that he prove his fitness prior to
resuming the practice of law. Specifically,
while retained to represent a client with a
New York tax issue, Brown's representation of
the client was not competent. He neglected
(and intentionally neglected) the client's case,
failed to adequately communicate with the
client, charged an unreasonable fee, did not
put an unearned fee in his trust account, and
failed to return an unearned fee to the client,
in violation of Rules 1.1(a), 1.3(a), 1.3(b)(1), 1.3(c),
1.4(a), 1.5(a), 1.15(e), and 1.16(d).
In re Kathleen A. Dolan. Bar No. 428925.
November 16, 2020. The Board on
Professional Responsibility recommended
that the D.C. Court of Appeals suspend Dolan
for nine months with the requirements that
she take a practice management course,
complete six hours of continuing legal education on trust account management, and
serve one year of probation under the supervision of a practice monitor. Her failure to
cooperate with the practice monitor would
result in revocation of her probation with a
requirement that she demonstrate fitness
before reinstatement. Dolan's husband and

sole law partner was the lead counsel for the
litigation and settlement of a collective
action. Together with her husband, Dolan
represented more than 100 current and
former security officers with wage claims
against their employer. They settled the case
without informing their clients of the settlement terms and took two-thirds of the settlement proceeds for their attorney's fees
without their clients' knowledge or approval.
While the Board found that Dolan's law
partner acted purposefully and dishonestly,
the Board concluded that Dolan acted negligently and that she misappropriated the
clients' settlement funds. The Board further
found various other violations, including mishandling of her trust account up until at least
the time of the hearing. (Rules 1.2(a), 1.4(a),
1.4(b), 1.4(c), 1.5(b), and 1.8(f) in Count I and
Rules 1.15(a), 1.15(c), and 1.5(a) in Count II.)
In re Anitha W. Johnson. Bar No. 495672.
October 13, 2020. The Board on Professional
Responsibility recommended that the D.C.
Court of Appeals disbar Johnson for misconduct in a variety of representations. In a first
matter, while retained to represent three
adults and two minor children in a civil rights
action alleging excessive use of force by
police, including the " striking and mishandling " of the two children, Johnson violated
Rules 1.1(a) and (b) (competence and skill),
1.3(a) and (c) (lack of diligence, promptness),
1.3(b)(1) and (2) (intentionally failing to seek
objectives, intentional prejudice), 1.4(a) and
(b) (failing to inform and explain), and 8.4(c)
(dishonesty). In a second matter, while
retained to represent a client in a divorce proceeding, Johnson violated Rule 1.1(a) and (b)
and Rule 1.6(a)(1) (knowingly revealing confidence/secret). In a third matter, while retained
to represent a client in a malpractice case,
Johnson violated Rules 1.1(a) and (b), 1.3(a)
and (c), 1.3(b)(1) and (2), 1.4(a) and (b), 1.15(a)
(recordkeeping), and 8.4(c). In a fourth matter,
while retained to represent a client in a
custody and personal injury matter, Johnson
violated Rules 1.2(a) (settling without client's
knowledge or consent); 1.3(b)(1) and (2); 1.3(c);
1.4(a) and (b); 1.4(c) (failing to communicate

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

46 WASHINGTON LAWYER

*

MARCH/APRIL 2021
Washington Lawyer - March/April 2021

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Washington Lawyer - March/April 2021
