Case ID: a3d_67/html/1057-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re Alfred A. PAGE, Jr., Respondent.
    No. 13-BG-309.
    Bar Registration No. 480892, BDN: 118-13.
    District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
    June 13, 2013.
    BEFORE: GLICKMAN, Associate Judge, and TERRY and STEADMAN, Senior Judges.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the certified order of the Court of Appeals of Maryland disbarring respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction, see Attorney Grievance Com’n of Maryland v. Page, 430 Md. 602, 62 A.3d 163 (2013), this court’s April 12, 2013, order suspending respondent pending further action of the court and directing him to show cause why the reciprocal discipline of disbarment should not be imposed, and the statement of Bar Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline, and it appearing that respondent filed a statement that he does not oppose the imposition of reciprocal discipline but requested a shortened period of time prior to filing for reinstatement, however, he has failed to file an affidavit as required by D.C.Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

ORDERED that Alfred A. Page, Jr., is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. See In re Sibley, 990 A.2d 483 (D.C.2010), and In re Fuller, 930 A.2d 194, 198 (D.C.2007) (re-buttable presumption of identical reciprocal discipline applies to all cases in which the respondent does not participate). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement respondent’s period of disbarment will not begin to run until such time as he files an affidavit that fully complies with the requirements of D.C.Bar R. XI, § 14(g).