Opinion
24-AP-070
04-19-2024
In re Eva P. Vekos, Esq. (Office of Disciplinary Counsel)
ENTRY ORDER
Original Jurisdiction Professional Responsibility Board
In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:
¶ 1. Respondent was placed on interim suspension status on March 27, 2024, based on her failure to cooperate with Disciplinary Counsel "in connection with a disciplinary matter." V.R.Pr.C. 8.1(b). See generally In re Vekos, 2024 VT 18, __ Vt. __, __ A.3d __(mem.). The Court found that respondent "knowingly fail[ed] to respond to a lawful demand for information from . . . [a] disciplinary authority" in violation of Rule 8.1(b), and that, due to her noncooperation, she "presently pose[d] a substantial threat of serious harm to the public." A.O. 9, Rule 22(A); see Vekos, 2024 VT 18, ¶¶ 11-15.
¶ 2. Respondent now moves for dissolution of the interim-suspension order under Administrative Order 9, Rule 22(D). She asserts that she has cooperated with Disciplinary Counsel's requests for information and no longer presents a risk of harm to the public. Disciplinary Counsel agrees that respondent has replied to his prior inquiries about the reasons, nature, and causes of her now-concluded medical leave. Consequently, Disciplinary Counsel does not oppose respondent's request to dissolve the interim suspension.
¶ 3. We grant the respondent's motion given her recent cooperation with Disciplinary Counsel. As nothing remains pending in this Court, this matter is closed.
The motion for dissolution of respondent's interim-suspension order is granted.
Paul L. Reiber, Chief Justice Harold E. Eaton, Jr., Associate Justice Karen R. Carroll, Associate Justice William D. Cohen, Associate Justice Nancy J. Waples, Associate Justice