Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Verdin

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NO. 22349 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I _________________________________________________________________ OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, vs. GEORGE A. VERDIN, Respondent. _________________________________________________________________ (ODC 98-296-5787, 98-308-5799, 00-077-6423, 00-175-6521, 00-279-6625, 00-280-6626, 00-281-6627) (By: ORDER OF DISBARMENT Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Ramil, and Acoba, JJ.) Upon consideration of the Disciplinary Board s Report and Recommendation for the Disbarment of George A. Verdin and Respondent s lack of objection thereto, as exhibited by his failure to request briefing as permitted by Rule 2.7(d) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i, it appears that Respondent Verdin has engaged in the practice of law in California, where he is not licensed to practice law, and has engaged in other behavior in violation of Rules 1.15(f)(3), 1.3, 1.4(a), 3.4(e), 5.5(a), 7.1(a), 8.1(a), 8.3(d)(2)(i), 8.4(a), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d) of the Hawai#i Rules of Professional Conduct. It further appears that Respondent has no Hawai#i practice to wind down and that application of Rule 2.16(c)(making disbarment orders effective thirty days after entry) would be inappropriate. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent George A. Verdin is disbarred from the practice of law in this jurisdiction, effective entry of this order. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, September 13, 2001. 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.