In re: John L. Clark, Jr.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
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. 01-BG-356 IN RE JOHN L. CLARK, JR., 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 September 26, 2002 Decided November 7, 2002) Before WAGNER, Chief Judge, and FARRELL, and GLICKMAN, Associate Judges. PER CURIAM: In this reciprocal discipline matter, the Board on Professional Responsibility recommends that respondent be suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for ninety days, with reinstatement conditioned upon a showing of fitness.* The misconduct, which transpired in the State of Maryland, consisted essentially of respondent s failure as an employer (a) to file Maryland income tax returns in a timely manner, (b) to pay trust fund income taxes withheld from employees wages and (c) to maintain a separate ledger account for withholding tax monies. Neither respondent nor Bar Counsel has made exceptions to the Board s recommendation. Given our limited scope of review in uncontested disciplinary cases, see * Respondent has been temporarily suspended by this court pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, § 11 (d). 2 In re Goldsborough, 654 A.2d 1285, 1287-88 (D.C. 1995), we adopt the Board s recommendation. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that John L. Clark, Jr. is suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for the period of ninety days, with reinstatement to be conditioned upon a showing of fitness. See D.C. Bar R. XI, § 3 (2). The ninety-day period will begin when respondent files an affidavit in compliance with D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14 (g), see In re Bowser, 771 A.2d 1002, 1009 (D.C. 2001) (per curiam); meanwhile he will remain suspended. So ordered.
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.
