Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Terence Taniform, Misc. Docket AG No. 40, September Term, 2021. Opinion by Gould, J. ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE – SANCTIONS – INDEFINITE SUSPENSION The Supreme Court of Maryland sanctioned an attorney with an indefinite suspension with the right to reapply for reinstatement after 18 months for providing incompetent representation, failing to file necessary papers, which nearly caused a client to get deported, failing to communicate adequately with his clients, failing to promptly refund money, and making intentional misrepresentations to clients, clients’ families, counsel, and Bar Counsel. Such conduct violated Maryland Attorneys’ Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1 (Competence), 1.3 (Diligence), 1.4(a) and (b) (Communication), 1.15 (Safekeeping of Property), 1.16(d) (Declining or Terminating Representation), 4.1 (Truthfulness in Statements to Others), 8.1(a) and (b) (Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters), and 8.4(a), (c), and (d) (Misconduct), and Maryland Rule 19-407 (Attorney Trust Account Record- Keeping). Circuit Court for Montgomery County Case No.: C-15-CV-21-000238 Argued: October 3, 2022 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MARYLAND* Misc. Docket AG No. 40 September Term, 2021 ______________________________________ ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND v. TERENCE TANIFORM ______________________________________ Fader, C.J., Watts, Hotten, Booth, Biran, Gould, Eaves, JJ. ______________________________________ Opinion by Gould, J. Pursuant to the Maryland Uniform Electronic Legal Materials Booth, J., concurs. Act (§§ 10-1601 et seq. of the State Government Article) this ______________________________________ document is authentic. 2022-12-16 14:38-05:00 Filed: December 16, 2022 Gregory Hilton, Clerk * At the November 8, 2022 general election, the voters of Maryland ratified a constitutional amendment changing the name of the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court of Maryland. The name change took effect on December 14, 2022. On November 17, 2021, pursuant to Maryland Rule 19-721, the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland (the “Commission”), acting through Bar Counsel, filed a Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action (the “Petition”) against Terence Taniform. The Petition alleged that Mr. Taniform violated multiple provisions of the Maryland Attorneys’ Rules of Professional Conduct (“MARPC”) and also violated the Professional Conduct for Practitioners governing federal immigration proceedings set forth in 8 C.F.R. § 1003.102. In accordance with Maryland Rules 19-722(a) and 19-727, we assigned the Petition to the Honorable Theresa M. Chernosky of the Circuit Court for Montgomery County (the “hearing judge”) to hold an evidentiary hearing and issue findings of fact and conclusions of law. The hearing occurred was held on May 16 and 17, 2022. At the beginning of the hearing, the parties presented the court with a joint exhibit of stipulated facts. Bar Counsel then presented its case with one witness and 31 exhibits. Mr. Taniform testified on his own behalf, called one character witness, and submitted no exhibits. On July 1, 2022, the hearing judge issued a written statement containing findings of fact and conclusions of law (the “findings”), concluding by clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Taniform violated MARPC 1.1 (Competence), 1 1.3 (Diligence), 1.4(a) and (b) Effective July 1, 2016, the Maryland Lawyers’ Rules of Professional Conduct 1 (“MLRPC”) were renamed the MARPC and recodified without substantive modification …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals