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

615 chars
ney to handle a legal matter without preparation adequate in the circumstances. Specifically, Bar Counsel claimed that Respondent’s failure to amend Ms. Nesbitt’s complaint to allege her entitlement to treble damages under the Maryland statute concerning the recovery of security deposits from landlords violated this rule. Once again, the Hearing Committee found that no violation was made out, and we agree. The Hearing Committee found two fundamental defects in Bar Counsel’s case. In the first place, the principal evidence underlying Bar Counsel’s theory concerning inadequate preparation was Bar Exhibit 12, 1