Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Natalie Thryphenia Collins, Misc. Docket AG No. 6, September Term, 2021 ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE – SANCTIONS – INDEFINITE SUSPENSION – This attorney grievance matter involves attorney who was subject of sixty-day definite suspension from practice of law in Maryland as result of unrelated disciplinary action. As result of information attorney alleged in petition for reinstatement and subsequent complaint, Bar Counsel filed new petition for disciplinary or remedial action against attorney. Bar Counsel dismissed allegations of misconduct in petition with respect to new complaint and proceeded on allegations in petition related to attorney’s allegedly false statements in petition for reinstatement and failure to respond to Bar Counsel’s requests for information concerning new complaint. Although Court of Appeals determined that attorney violated Maryland Attorneys’ Rules of Professional Conduct (“MARPC”) 3.3(a)(1) (Candor Toward Tribunal), 8.1(a) (False Statement of Material Fact), 8.1(b) (Failing to Respond to Lawful Demand for Information), 8.4(b) (Criminal Act), 8.4(c) (Dishonesty, Fraud, Deceit, or Misrepresentation), 8.4(d) (Conduct that is Prejudicial to Administration of Justice), and 8.4(a) (Violating MARPC), Court concluded that, given nature of false statements at issue and developing caselaw, disbarment was not appropriate sanction. In numerous attorney disciplinary cases involving intentional dishonesty under MARPC 8.4(c) and knowingly made false statements under MARPC 3.3(a)(1) and 8.1(a), Court has not imposed sanction of disbarment and has not found pursuant to Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Vanderlinde, 364 Md. 376, 773 A.2d 463 (2001), existence of compelling extenuating circumstances to be “root cause” of misconduct to warrant lesser sanction. Given this line of cases, Court expressly recognized that holding in Vanderlinde no longer exclusively sets standard for imposition of sanction in cases involving intentional dishonesty. Court of Appeals indefinitely suspended attorney from practice of law in Maryland. Circuit Court for Baltimore City Case No. 24-C-21-001838 Argued: January 11, 2022 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND Misc. Docket AG No. 6 September Term, 2021 ______________________________________ ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND v. NATALIE THRYPHENIA COLLINS ______________________________________ Getty, C.J. *McDonald Watts Hotten Booth Biran Gould, JJ. ______________________________________ Opinion by Watts, J. ______________________________________ Filed: February 25, 2022 *McDonald, J. now retired, participated in the hearing and conference of this case while an active member of this Court; after being recalled Pursuant to Maryland Uniform Electronic Legal Materials Act Pursuant to MD Constitution, Article IV, Section (§§ 10-1601 et seq. of the State Government Article) this document is authentic. 3A, he also participated in the decision and 2022-02-25 13:17-05:00 adoption of this opinion. Suzanne C. Johnson, Clerk Natalie Thryphenia Collins, Respondent, a member of the Bar of Maryland, was admitted to the Bar in 1991 and from October 2019 to mid-June 2020 worked at a law firm on Ingleside Avenue in Baltimore, Maryland. On June 8, 2020, in an unrelated disciplinary matter, this Court suspended Collins from the practice of law in Maryland for sixty days, effective July 8, 2020, and ordered that she pay court costs. On September 10, 2020, Collins filed in this Court a petition for reinstatement pursuant …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals