Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Jude Ambe, Misc. Docket AG No. 21, September Term, 2018. Opinion by Barbera, CJ. ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT — DISCIPLINE — DISBARMENT — Respondent Jude Ambe violated Maryland Attorneys’ Rules of Professional Conduct 19-301.1, 19- 301.2, 19-301.3, 19-301.4, 19-301.5, 19-301.15, 19-301.16, 19-303.3, 19-308.1, and 19- 308.4. These violations principally arose from Respondent’s inexcusable failure to appear in court; various material misrepresentations to a tribunal and Bar Counsel; neglect of his client’s case; and failure to properly maintain client funds in his attorney trust account. In conjunction with several aggravating factors, these violations result in disbarment as the appropriate sanction for Respondent’s misconduct. Circuit Court for Montgomery County Case No. 455261-V Argued: September 8, 2019 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND Misc. Docket AG No. 21 September Term, 2018 ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISION OF MARYLAND v. JUDE AMBE Barbera, C.J., McDonald Watts Hotten Getty Booth Adkins, Sally D., (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned) JJ. Opinion by Barbera, C.J. Pursuant to Maryland Uniform Electronic Legal Materials Act (§§ 10-1601 et seq. of the State Government Article) this document is authentic. Filed: October 21, 2019 2019-10-21 12:49-04:00 Suzanne C. Johnson, Clerk Petitioner, the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland, acting through Bar Counsel, filed in this Court a Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action against Respondent, Jude Ambe, regarding a complaint filed against him by a former client, Hans Yondo Ngale (“Mr. Ngale”). The petition alleges violations of the Maryland Attorneys’ Rules of Professional Conduct (“MARPC”) 19-301.1 (Competence), 19-301.2 (Scope of Representation), 19-301.3 (Diligence), 19-301.4 (Communication), 19-301.5 (Fees), 19- 301.15 (Safekeeping Property), 19-301.16 (Declining or Terminating Representation), 19- 303.3 (Candor), 19-308.1 (Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters), and 19-308.4 (Misconduct). On September 20, 2018, Petitioner filed its petition. This Court transmitted the matter to the Circuit Court for Montgomery County and designated the Honorable James A. Bonifant (“the hearing judge”) to conduct an evidentiary hearing and make proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. The hearing took place on February 13-14, 2019. At the hearing, the judge heard testimony from Respondent and Mr. Ngale. We adopt in large part the hearing judge’s proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. Based on the rule violations that Respondent committed, as well as the aggravating and mitigating factors we have identified, we disbar Respondent. I. The Hearing Judge’s Findings of Fact We summarize here the hearing judge’s findings of fact, which are supported by clear and convincing evidence. 1 Background Respondent was admitted to the New York Bar in 2009. He is not a member of the Maryland Bar.1 During his legal career, Respondent operated an immigration law practice. While representing Mr. Ngale, Petitioner maintained an office in Montgomery County, Maryland. Mr. Ngale is a citizen of the Republic of Cameroon. His native language is Bakweri and he speaks Pidgin English. He entered the United States through Mexico in April 2016 and immediately applied for asylum. In a written statement given to the Department of Homeland Security, Mr. Ngale claimed he was imprisoned ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals