Matter of Becker

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN THE MATTER OF A MEMBER OF THE BAR OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE: § § § § § RICHARD D. BECKER, Respondent. No. 235, 2001 Board Case Nos. 27, 31, 32, & 33, 2000 § § § Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: July 31, 2001 Before WALSH, HOLLAND and BERGER, Justices. ORDER This 31st day of July 2001, the Board on Professional Responsibility having filed on May 17, 2001, a Report, pursuant to Rule 9(d) of the Rules of the Delaware Lawyers Rules of Disciplinary Procedure; and the Respondent and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel having chosen to file no objections to the Board's Report; and the Court having heard oral argument and reviewed the matter pursuant to Rule 9(e) of the Rules of the Delaware Lawyers Rules of Disciplinary Procedure; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, that the attached Report of the Board on Professional Responsibility filed on May 17, 2001 and the proposed sanctions set forth therein are hereby APPROVED, with one additional condition. That condition is that during the three-year probationary period now approved, the Respondent shall have all present and future clients sign a written acknowledgement that they have been advised of the Respondent s probationary status and the limitations that this Court has placed on his law practice. The form of letter must be approved by the Office of Disciplinary counsel on or before August 7, 2001. Copies of the signed acknowledgements for all present clients must be given to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel by September 1, 2001 and copies of the signed acknowledgements for future clients must be given to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel on the first of each month thereafter. As otherwise recommended, the Respondent is publicly reprimanded and placed on a three-year public probationary period, subject to all of the conditions set forth in the Board s Report. The matter is hereby CLOSED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Randy J. Holland Justice 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.