Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Agmata

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCAD-17-0000410 27-JUN-2017 10:14 AM SCAD-17-0000410 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, vs. VICTOR AGMATA, JR., Respondent. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (ODC CASE NO. 16-0-401) ORDER OF SUSPENSION (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.) Upon consideration of the petition submitted on May 11, 2017 by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC), requesting the immediate suspension of Respondent Victor Agmata, Jr. from the practice of law pursuant to Rule 2.12A of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i (RSCH), the declaration and exhibits attached thereto, and the record, we find Respondent Agmata has failed to meaningfully or substantively respond to lawful requests from ODC regarding its investigations into alleged misconduct committed by him, or to respond by the June 6, 2017 deadline to this court’s May 22, 2017 order to show cause as to why he should not be immediately suspended for the above conduct. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.12A, Respondent Agmata is suspended from the practice of law. This order is effective immediately and until further order of this court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this order imposing suspension upon Respondent Agmata shall constitute a suspension for purposes of RSCH Rule 2.16. The Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i and Respondent Agmata shall therefore comply with the relevant requirements of that Rule. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the Clerk shall forthwith distribute a copy of this order to all judges, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.16(f). Distribution may be by electronic mail. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, June 27, 2017. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson 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.