Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
In Re Belli
Citations: 766 A.2d 526; 2001 D.C. App. LEXIS 83; 2001 WL 66303Docket: 99-BG-1625
Court: District of Columbia Court of Appeals; January 25, 2001; District Of Columbia; State Supreme Court
Respondent Melvin C. Belli was suspended from practicing law in California due to misappropriating funds from a trust established by his father, which he managed as trustee. The California disciplinary action was based on findings of "gross negligence." The Board on Professional Responsibility recommended a two-year suspension from practicing law in the District of Columbia, contingent upon the respondent demonstrating fitness for reinstatement and fulfilling probation requirements imposed by California. The D.C. Court of Appeals emphasized the principle of reciprocal discipline, stating that deference should be given to the disciplinary measures taken by other jurisdictions, particularly when there are no objections from either the respondent or Bar Counsel. Although the D.C. standards for misappropriation typically lean towards disbarment, the court found that the specifics of this case, including the lack of clarity regarding the degree of negligence and the unopposed nature of the recommendation, supported the Board's proposed sanction. The court ordered that the two-year suspension take effect retroactively from July 21, 1999, the date of the California suspension, acknowledging the respondent's compliance with conditions for such retroactive enforcement. The ruling noted that the respondent's misconduct appeared to be part of a familial context rather than a direct attorney-client relationship.