judyrecords
600 million+
United States Court Cases

District Of Columbia Court Of Appeals Record

IN RE: PETER A. ALLEN

Case Information: 10-BG-1028
Short Caption:IN RE: PETER A. ALLENClassification:Bar Governance - Bar - Disciplinary Reciprocal
Superior Court or Agency Case Number:BDN267-10Filed Date:08/20/2010

Opening Event Date:08/20/2010Case Status:Closed
Record Completed:Post-Decision Matter Pending:
Briefs Completed:
Argued/Submitted:
Disposition:Next Scheduled Action:
Mandate Issued:

Party Information
Appellate RoleParty NameIFPAttorney(s)Arguing AttorneyE-Filer
PetitionerBar CounselN
Wallace E. Shipp NN
William R. RossNY
PetitionerBoard on Professional ResponsibilityN
Charles J. WilloughbyNN
RespondentPeter A. Allen NPro SeN

Events
Event DateStatusDescriptionResult
08/20/2010DISCIPLINARY LETTER from the Office of Bar Counsel with a certified copy of an orer of the Supreme Judicial Court for Suffolk County, Massachusetts suspending respondent. Respondent was administratively suspended from the District of Columbia Bar on September 30, 2002, for failure to pay his dues and failure to file the required annual registration statements, and remains suspended.
08/23/2010RECEIVED from the Office of BAr Counsel a copy of a letter to respondent advising respondent of Bar Counsel's recommendation to the Court that respondent be suspended pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, Sec 11 (d) and of the requirement that respondent file an affidavit pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, Sec 14 (g).
09/02/2010ORDER Having received a certified copy of an order of the Supreme Judicial Court for Suffolk County, Massachusetts, suspending respondent from the practice of law for one year and a day, it is, accordingly, pursuant to D.C. Bar Rule XI, Sec 11 (d), ORDERED that respondent is suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia pending final disposition of this proceeding, effective on the date of entry of this order, and it is FURTHER ORDERED that respondent show cause within thirty days why he should not be suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for one year and a day, with his reinstatement conditioned upon a showing of fitness. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Bar Counsel shall reply to respondent's responses no later than fifteen days after service of the response. Alternatively, no later than fifteen days after respondent's response was due, Bar Counsel may object to the imposition of reciprocal discipline based upon the factors set forth in D.C. Bar Rule XI, Sec 11 (c). Bar Counsel shall provide the Court with the relevant portions of the record of the proceeding in the other disciplining court, the statute and rules that governed it, and a short statement identifying all of the issues that the matter presents. It is FURTHER ORDERED that if Bar Counsel opposes the imposition of identical discipline, Bar Counsel shall (1) recommend appropriate non-identical discipline or (2) request that the matter be referred to the Board for its recommendation as to discipline. Respondent may reply within ten days after service of Bar Counsel's submission. It is FURTHER ORDERED that respondent's attention is drawn to the requirement of Rule XI, Sec 14 relating to suspended attorneys and to the provisions of Rule XI, Sec 16 (c) dealing with the timing of eligibility for reinstatement as related to compliance with Rule XI, Sec 14, including the filing of the required affidavit. (ETW)
09/15/2010RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (respondent) that it is not unreasonable to impose identical discipline in the District of Columbia retroactive to the date on which the Supreme Judicial Court entered its order.
09/23/2010STATEMENT of Bar Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline.
09/28/2010TMC - notice of reciprocal discipline - OTSC - statement of Bar Counsel - proposed order
10/14/2010AFFIDAVIT of respondent
11/12/2010FiledSUSPENSION ORDERED that Peter A. Allen, Esquire, is hereby suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia cor a period of one year and one day with a fitness requirement. It is FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement respondent's suspension began to run when he filed his D.C. Bar R. XI, Sec 14 (g) affidavit on October 14, 2010. (RD,TE,KG)
09/14/2012FiledReceived a copy of respondent affidavit filed on October 9, 2010. (Respondent)