Opinion
AG No. 83, Sept. Term, 2022
09-01-2023
ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND v. Purcell S. LUKE
ORDER
Upon consideration of the Joint Petition for Reprimand filed by the Petitioner, the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland, and Respondent, Purcell S. Luke, on August 29, 2023, in the above-captioned case, in which the parties advise that the Respondent agrees that his conduct, as described in the Joint Petition, violated Rules 1.1 (competence), 1.3 (diligence), 1.4(a) and (b) (communication), 1.15 (safekeeping property), 1.16(d) (declining or terminating representation), 8.1(b) (disciplinary matters) and 8.4(d) (misconduct) of the Maryland Attorneys’ Rules of Professional Conduct and that the Respondent consents to a reprimand as the appropriate sanction, it is this 1st day of September 2023
ORDERED, by the Supreme Court of Maryland, that the Respondent, Purcell S. Luke, is REPRIMANDED for violating Rules 1.1 (competence), 1.3 (diligence), 1.4(a) and (b) (communication), 1.15 (safekeeping property), 1.16(d) (declining or terminating representation), 8.1(b) (disciplinary matters) and 8.4(d) (misconduct) of the Maryland Attorneys’ Rules of Professional Conduct.