Case ID: md_300/html/0025-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      ELDRIDGE, Judge,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

475 A.2d 1167
    ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND v. Thomas Philip POWERS, Mose Lewis III, Steven Martin Cooper and Douglas James Adams.
    Misc. (BV) No. 17,
    Sept. Term, 1983.
    Court of Appeals of Maryland.
    June 4, 1984.
    Kenneth R. West, Washington, D.C., for respondents Thomas Philip Powers and Mose Lewis III.
    
      Steven Martin Cooper and Douglas James Adams, in pro. per.
    Glenn M. Grossman, Asst. Bar Counsel, Annapolis (Melvin Hirshman, Annapolis, Bar Counsel, on the petition), for petitioner.
    Argued before MURPHY, C.J., ELDRIDGE, COLE, DAVIDSON, RODOWSKY and COUCH, JJ., and MORTON, JAMES C., Jr., Retired, Specially Assigned, Judge.
   ORDER

The Court having considered the findings of fact and conclusions of law filed in these proceedings by Judge L. Leonard Ruben of the Circuit Court for Montgomery County; and

Judge Ruben having found that the respondents engaged in the practice of law under the trade name “Union Legal Services” in violation of DR 2-102(A) of the Code of Professional Responsibility; and

Bar Counsel having recommended that a public reprimand be issued to the respondents; and

It appearing that the respondents were not cognizant of the prohibition against trade names contained in DR 2-102(A) and immediately discontinued such usage upon notification by Bar Counsel of the violation of DR 2-102(A); and

It further appearing to the Court that while “Union Legal Services” is a prohibited trade name violative of DR 2-102(A), see In re Corporate Name—Oldtowne, 285 Md. 132, 400 A.2d 1111 (1979), no disciplinary sanction is appropriate in the circumstances of this case and the charges should be dismissed upon payment of all costs of these proceedings by the respondents.

It is this 4th day of June, 1984, ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that upon payment of all costs of these proceedings by the respondents the charges shall be forthwith dismissed.

ELDRIDGE, Judge,

concurring in part and dissenting in part:

I fully concur in that portion of the Order dismissing the charges. I would not, however, require that the respondents pay all costs of these proceedings.

I am authorized to state that Judge DAVIDSON concurs in the views expressed herein.