Case ID: a3d_97/html/0592-01.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 Pierce Henry O’DONNELL, Respondent.
    No. 14-BG-478.
    District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
    Filed Aug. 21, 2014.
    Before BECKWITH, Associate Judge, and NEBEKER and TERRY, Senior Judges.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM

On consideration of the certified order suspending respondent for a period of one year, all but six months stayed, followed by a two-year probation in the state of California, this court’s May 20, 2014, order directing respondent to show cause why reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, the statement of Bar Counsel, and it appearing that respondent has failed to file either a response to this court’s order to show cause or the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

ORDERED that Pierce Henry O’Donnell is hereby suspended for a period of one year, all but six months stayed, followed by a two-year probationary period. 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 the period of respondent’s suspension 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) and fully serves the 120-day suspension previously imposed in In re O’Donnell, 50 A.3d 475 (D.C.2012).