From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Attorney Grievance v. Worsham

Court of Appeals of Maryland
Mar 8, 2006
391 Md. 461 (Md. 2006)

Opinion

Misc. Docket AG No. 2, September Term, 2005.

March 8, 2006.

John C. Borderick, Asst. Bar Counsel (Melvin Hirshman, Bar Counsel, Atty. Grievance Com'n), for petitioner.

Charles E. Iliff, Jr., Pasadena, for respondent.


ORDER

The Court having considered the Petition for Disciplinary Action, the proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law submitted by the hearing judge, the exceptions and recommendations of the parties filed hereto and the oral argument of counsel in the above-captioned case, it is this 8th day of March, 2006.

ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that the exceptions and recommendation of Bar Counsel be, and they are hereby, overruled, and the petition for disciplinary action is dismissed. Costs to be paid by the Attorney Grievance Commission.


Summaries of

Attorney Grievance v. Worsham

Court of Appeals of Maryland
Mar 8, 2006
391 Md. 461 (Md. 2006)
Case details for

Attorney Grievance v. Worsham

Case Details

Full title:ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND, Petitioner, v. Michael Craig…

Court:Court of Appeals of Maryland

Date published: Mar 8, 2006

Citations

391 Md. 461 (Md. 2006)
893 A.2d 1119

Citing Cases

Byndloss v. State

The majority characterizes the central issue in the case as "whether the extended length of time that the…