Case ID: a3d_92/html/1142-01.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 Michelle Hamilton DAVY, Respondent.
    No. 14-BG-4.
    District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
    Filed June 12, 2014.
    Bar Registration No. 454524, BDN: 357-13.
    BEFORE: McLEESE, Associate Judge, and STEADMAN and REID, 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. Davy, 435 Md. 674, 80 A.3d 322 (2013), this court’s February 3, 2014, order directing respondent to show cause why the reciprocal discipline of disbarment should not be imposed, this court’s April 29, 2014, order that filed respondent’s motion to stay as her response, and the statement of Bar Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline, and it appearing that respondent has failed to file her affidavit as required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g) and that her response does not satisfy any of the grounds for not imposing reciprocal discipline, see D.C. Bar R. XI § 11(c), it is

ORDERED that Michelle Hamilton Davy 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) (rebuttable 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 she files an affidavit that fully complies with the requirements of D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g).