Maryland case law › Attorney Grievance Commission v. Samstag

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Samstag

296 Md. 64 (1983) · Maryland Court of Appeals
Maryland Court of AppealsDisposition: Other✓ Good law
HoldingThe Attorney Grievance Commission, through Bar Counsel, filed a petition for disciplinary action against Frank J.

Per Curiam The Attorney Grievance Commission, acting through Bar Counsel, filed a petition for disciplinary action pursuant to 65 Maryland Rule BV9 against Frank J. Samstag, alleging violations of the Disciplinary Rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The matter was referred to Judge Audrey E. Melbourne of the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County to make findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Maryland Rule BV10. At the hearing before Judge Melbourne, evidence was adduced showing that the Supreme Court of California disbarred Samstag, effective March 19, 1982, for having wilfully misappropriated the approximate sum of $30,000 entrusted to him in a fiduciary capacity and for having wilfully misappropriated to his own use and purpose the additional sum of $7,500 Maryland Rule BV10 e 1 provides that "[a] final adjudication by a judicial tribunal in a disciplinary proceeding that an attorney has been guilty of misconduct is conclusive proof of the misconduct in the hearing of charges pursuant to this Rule.” Bar Counsel’s petition for disciplinary action asserted that Samstag’s misconduct violated DR 1-102(A)(1), (3), (4), (5), and (6). 1 Judge Melbourne concluded in her findings that Bar Counsel’s charges

This is a preview of Attorney Grievance Commission v. Samstag. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.