Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Good

Court of Appeals of Maryland

December 21, 2015

ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND
v.
TAMARA RENEE GOOD

Argued November 5, 2015.

Page 55

Circuit Court for Baltimore County. Case No.: 03-C-14-13449. Circuit Court for Baltimore County. Case No.: 03-C-15-004149.

JaCina N. Stanton, Assistant Bar Counsel, (Glenn M. Grossman, Bar Counsel, Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland), FOR PETITIONER.

No response on behalf of Respondent, FOR RESPONDENT.

Barbera, C.J., Battaglia, Greene, Adkins, McDonald, Watts, Harrell, Glenn T., Jr. (Retired, Specially Assigned), JJ.

OPINION

Page 56

[445 Md. 494] Adkins, J.

The Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland (" AGC" ), acting through Bar Counsel, filed two Petitions for Disciplinary or Remedial Action (" petitions" ) against Respondent Tamara [445 Md. 495] Renee Good (" Good" ) on August 28, 2014 and January 7, 2015. Bar Counsel charged Good with violating the Maryland Lawyers' Rules of Professional Conduct (" MLRPC" ) in her capacity as a representative of Blaine A. White, Jeanne P. Delaney, Joseph A. Chester, III, Eriss Tubman, Cynthia Lewis, and Paul D. Newman. Specifically, Bar Counsel alleged that Good violated the following rules: (1) MLRPC 1.1 (Competence); (2) MLRPC 1.2 (Scope of Representation and Allocation of Authority Between Client and Lawyer); (3) MLRPC 1.3 (Diligence); (4) MLRPC 1.4 (Communication); (5) MLRPC 1.5 (Fees); (6) MLRPC 1.15 (Safekeeping Property); (7) MLRPC 1.16 (Declining or Terminating Representation); (8) MLRPC 8.1 (Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters); and (9) MLRPC 8.4 (Misconduct). In addition,

Page 57

Bar Counsel alleged that Good violated § 10-306 of the Maryland Code (1989, Repl. Vol. 2010), Business Occupations and Professions Article.

Pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-752(a), we referred the petitions to the Honorable Nancy M. Purpura (" hearing judge" ) of the Circuit Court for Baltimore County to conduct an evidentiary hearing and make findings of fact and conclusions of law. Good did not attend the hearings conducted on April 2, 2015 and August 21, 2015. Following the hearings, Judge Purpura issued findings of fact and conclusions of law, in which she found bye clear and convincing evidence that Good violated MLRPC 1.1; MLRPC 1.2(a); MLRPC 1.3; MLRPC 1.4(a) and (b); MLRPC 1.5(a); MLRPC 1.15(a), (c), and (d); MLRPC 1.16(d); MLRPC 8.1(b); MLRPC 8.4(a), (c), and (d); and § 10-306 of the Maryland Code, Business Occupations and Professions Article. Neither Bar Counsel nor Good filed exceptions to the hearing judge's findings of fact or conclusions of law. Good did not appear before us for oral argument as to sanction. We issued a per curiam order on November 6, 2015, disbarring Good immediately from the practice of law. We now explain the reasons for that order.

THE HEARING JUDGE'S FINDINGS OF FACT

Tamara Good was admitted to the Maryland Bar on December 17, 2008, and maintained a practice in Towson, Maryland. [445 Md. 496] Because the petitions here arose out of six separate client complaints, we set forth the hearing ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.