In re: Vester L. Van
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Note to readers: To navigate within this document use the set of icons listed above on the Acrobat toolbar. These opinions are made available as a joint effort by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals and the District of Columbia Bar. Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS No. 98-BG-26 IN RE VESTER L. VAN, RESPONDENT. A Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals On Report and Recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility (Submitted February 25, 1999 Decided March 18, 1999) Before TERRY, STEADMAN, and SCHWELB, Associate Judges. PER CURIAM: The Board on Professional Responsibility has recommended that reciprocal discipline be imposed against Vester L. Van, Esquire, a member of our Bar, and that Van be disbarred. We adopt the recommendation of the Board. The conduct that led to the imposition of discipline in other jurisdictions is described in State ex rel. Nebraska State Bar v. Van, 556 N.W.2d 39, 41-43 (Neb. 1996) (per curiam) (Van I). On September 23, 1994, Van was suspended from practice for one year by the Supreme Court of Illinois for multiple acts of neglect and dishonesty vis-a-vis several of his clients in that jurisdiction. On December 5, 1996, following a reciprocal disciplinary proceeding in Nebraska, Van was disbarred in that jurisdiction on the basis of his misconduct in Illinois and his failure to cooperate in the Nebraska proceeding. Van I, supra, 556 N.W.2d at 42-44. After having been suspended from practice in Illinois, Van ignored the 2 order of suspension and continued to represent clients in court proceedings in Illinois. him, New disciplinary proceedings were instituted against Van, charging inter dishonesty, alia, fraud, with unauthorized deceit, or practice of misrepresentation. law Van and did conduct not involving contest the charges, but instead moved to have his name stricken from the roll of attorneys in Illinois. His motion was accompanied by an affidavit in which he acknowledged that if the charges pending against him had proceeded to a hearing, the evidence would clearly and convincingly establish that he had engaged in the misconduct with which he was charged. On December 3, 1996, the Supreme Court of Illinois entered an order striking Van's name. Upon consideration of the proceedings in Illinois and Nebraska, the Board has recommended disbarment. Neither Bar Counsel nor Van has filed an exception to the Board's recommendation. therefore extremely deferential. Our review of the Board's proposed sanction is See, e.g., In re Goldsborough, 654 A.2d 1285, 1288 (D.C. 1995) (articulating standard of review in reciprocal discipline case where Board's recommendation is unopposed). Accordingly, Vester L. Van is hereby disbarred, effective March 9, 1998.1 So ordered. 1 This is the date on which Van filed an affidavit in compliance with D.C. Bar R. XI, ยง 14 (g). Van had been temporarily suspended from the practice of law in the District by an order of this court issued on January 21, 1998. 3
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.
