| Case Digest |
Respondent successively failed to appear for an informal admonition, a private reprimand, and a public censure scheduled in this matter. By order of September 23, 1999, the Supreme Court referred the matter to the Disciplinary Board for consideration and recommendation as to the appropriate discipline. In its Report and Recommendation to the Court the Board was troubled by Respondent's allowing a matter which should have been resolved by way of the mildest form of discipline to escalate to a loss of his license. Given Respondent's total disregard for the disciplinary system, the Board recommended a suspension which would require him to prove his fitness to practice law prior to being reinstated. |
