Case Name: In re Larry J. FELDMAN, Respondent
Court: District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: District of Columbia
Decision Date: 2015-04-30
Citations: 113 A.3d 1084
Docket Number: No. 14-BG-108
Parties: In re Larry J. FELDMAN, Respondent.
Judges: BEFORE: BECKWITH, Associate Judge, and KING and REID, Senior Judges.
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 113
Pages: 1084–1085

Head Matter:
In re Larry J. FELDMAN, Respondent.
No. 14-BG-108.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
Filed April 30, 2015.
BEFORE: BECKWITH, Associate Judge, and KING and REID, Senior Judges.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM
On consideration of the certified order of the Court of Appeals of Maryland indefinitely suspending respondent from the practice- of law in that jurisdiction, see Attorney Grievance Com'n of Maryland v. Feldman, 441 Md. 212, 106 A.3d 1158 (2014), this court's February 12, 2014, order suspending respondent and directing him to show cause why the functionally equivalent discipline in the form of a suspension for a period of five years or until reinstated to the bar of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, whichever is first, with his reinstatement conditioned upon a showing of fitness, should not be imposed, the statement of respondent, respondent's D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g) affidavits filed on March 11, 2014, this court's April 14, 2014, order that stayed final resolution until after the proceedings in Maryland had been completed, this court's February 18, 2015, order that lifted the stay, continued respondent's suspension, and directed him to show cause why the functionally equivalent discipline in the form of a suspension for a period of five years or until reinstated to the bar of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, whichever is first, with his reinstatement conditioned upon a showing of fitness, should not be imposed, and the statements of respondent and Bar Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline, it is
ORDERED that Larry J. Feldman is hereby indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia, nunc pro tunc to March 11, 2014. Re spondent is eligible to seek reinstatement after a period of five years or after reinstatement to either the bar of Maryland or the bar of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, whichever occurs first. Reinstatement is also contingent upon a showing of fitness. See In re Sibley, 990 A.2d 483 (D.C.2010) (rebuttable presumption of identical reciprocal discipline applies to all cases in which the respondent does not participate); In re Maignan, 988 A.2d 493 (D.C.2010) (the functional equivalent discipline to an indefinite suspension imposed by the state of Maryland with no set time within which to seek reinstatement is an indefinite suspension with a fitness requirement with the right to seek reinstatement in five years or after reinstatement by the state of Maryland).