Case Title: Application of Moneri for Admission to the Bar

Citation: 

Docket Number: 29m/22

State: maryland

Court: Maryland Supreme Court

Date: 2023-05-31T00:00:00Z

Document:
Show cause hearing held May 5, 2023. 
 
 
IN THE SUPREME COURT 
 
OF MARYLAND* 
 
 
 
Misc. No. 29 
 
 
 
September Term, 2022 
 
 
 
          
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION 
OF NEO KAMOHELO MONERI FOR 
ADMISSION TO THE BAR OF MARYLAND  
 
      
     
 
 
Fader, C.J. 
Watts 
Hotten 
Booth 
Biran 
Gould 
Eaves, 
 
 JJ. 
 
Order 
 
       Hotten, J., dissents. 
 
 
 
 
Filed: May 31, 2023  
 
* During the November 8, 2022 general election, the voters of Maryland ratified a 
constitutional amendment changing the name of the Court of Appeals of Maryland to the 
Supreme Court of Maryland. The name change took effect on December 14, 2022.
Pursuant to the Maryland Uniform Electronic Legal Materials 
Act (§§ 10-1601 et seq. of the State Government Article) this 
document is authentic. 
 
Gregory Hilton, Clerk 
2023-06-02 09:21-04:00
 
 
O R D E R 
 
The Court having considered the favorable recommendations of the Character 
Committee for the Seventh Appellate Judicial Circuit and the State Board of Law 
Examiners concerning the application of Neo Kamohelo Moneri for admission to the Bar 
of Maryland, it is this 31st day of May 2023, by the Supreme Court of Maryland, a majority 
of the Court concurring,  
ORDERED that the favorable recommendations of the Character Committee for the 
Seventh Appellate Judicial Circuit and State Board of Law Examiners are accepted, and it 
is further 
ORDERED that the applicant shall be admitted to the Bar upon taking the oath 
prescribed by the statute.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
      
 
 
 
 
 
 
             
           /s/ Matthew J. Fader 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   Chief Justice 
 
 
 
 
 
IN THE MATTER OF THE 
APPLICATION OF NEO 
KAMOHELO MONERI FOR 
ADMISSION TO THE BAR OF 
MARYLAND 
 
* 
 
* 
 
* 
 
* 
 
* 
 
* 
 
     IN THE 
 
     SUPREME COURT 
 
     OF MARYLAND 
 
     Misc. No. 29 
 
     September Term, 2022     
 
 
IN THE SUPREME COURT 
 
OF MARYLAND 
 
 
 
Misc. No. 29 
 
 
 
September Term, 2022 
 
 
 
          
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION 
OF NEO KAMOHELO MONERI FOR 
ADMISSION TO THE BAR OF MARYLAND  
 
      
     
 
 
Fader, C.J. 
Watts 
Hotten 
Booth 
Biran 
Gould 
Eaves, 
 
 JJ. 
 
 
 
Dissent to the Order by Hotten, J. 
 
 
 
 
Filed: May 31, 2023 
Attorneys enjoy a distinct position of trust and confidence that carries the 
significant responsibility and obligation to be caretakers for the system of 
justice that is essential to the continuing existence of a civilized society.  Each 
attorney, therefore, as a custodian of the system of justice, must be conscious 
of this responsibility and exhibit traits that reflect a personal responsibility 
to recognize, honor, and enhance the rule of law in this society. 
 
Md. Att’ys’ Rules of Prof. Conduct App’x 19-B (emphasis added). 
Respectfully, I dissent from the majority.  I am not persuaded that Mr. Moneri has 
demonstrated the requisite character and fitness to practice law in Maryland.  The conduct 
reflected in the record suggests a self-centered and reckless disregard for the property 
interests of others, the law and legal process.1  Such traits are inconsistent with the requisite 
character and fitness to practice law. 
We expect attorneys who practice law to exemplify the highest virtues of character, 
honesty, and integrity.  Those qualities serve as the underpinnings for our profession and 
have been the hallmark of the careers of many distinguished members of our Bar.  Matter 
of Knight, 464 Md. 118, 120–21, 211 A.3d 265, 266 (2019) (“No attribute in a lawyer is 
more important than good moral character; indeed, it is absolutely essential to the 
preservation of our legal system and the integrity of the courts.”  (internal quotation marks 
and citation omitted)).  The practice of law is a privilege.  This privilege is a sacred trust, 
the acceptance of which is accompanied by a measure of responsibility.  Attorneys are 
entrusted with safeguarding client funds, confidences, the responsibility to comply with the 
law and timely adhere to court appearances.  See, e.g., Att’y Grievance Comm’n v. Ficker,  
 
1 In its Report and Recommendation, the Character Committee recognized that Mr. 
Moneri knew what “he was doing . . . to be wrong,” but believed he could “negate the 
wrongfulness of [his] conduct[]” by “remedy[ing] [his] wrongdoing quickly[.]” 
2 
 
477 Md. 537, 566, 271 A.3d 227, 244 (2022) (citation omitted) (“Competent representation 
. . . requires the attorney’s presence at any court proceeding for which he or she was 
retained, absent an acceptable explanation for that attorney’s absence.”  (emphasis added) 
(internal quotation marks and citation omitted)); Att’y Grievance Comm’n v. Jones, 428 
Md. 457, 469, 52 A.3d 76, 83 (2012) (“It has been our long-held . . . position that the 
entrustment to [attorneys] of the money and property of others involves a responsibility of 
the highest order, and further, that [a]ppropriating any part of those funds to their own use 
and benefit without clear authority to do so cannot be tolerated.”  (emphasis added) 
(internal quotation marks and citations omitted)). 
On the day the Court scheduled the hearing to consider Mr. Moneri’s application 
for admission, he appeared an hour late, presenting no excuse or explanation for his 
tardiness.  During his remarks to the Court, he acknowledged appreciation for the wrongful 
nature of his conduct yet offered no excuse or explanation for it.  What a disappointing 
reflection regarding the importance of respecting the privilege to practice law.  One can 
hope that Mr. Moneri dedicates himself to ensuring that the behaviors which caused 
concerns regarding his character and fitness to enter this noble legal profession, do not 
repeat themselves.  Only if he takes this humbling moment to heart and practices law 
consistent with the high standards applicable to this profession, will he do well.  
Accordingly, I dissent.