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 Dixon
Citations: 721 A.2d 168; 1998 D.C. App. LEXIS 226; 1998 WL 850463Docket: No. 97-BG-1990
Court: District of Columbia Court of Appeals; December 9, 1998; District Of Columbia; State Supreme Court
Samuel E. Dixon, Jr., a member of the Connecticut Bar and this court, settled a personal injury claim for $13,500 without informing his client of the settlement amount or his intention to settle prior to doing so. He presented a general release to the insurance company, falsely claiming it was signed by the client in the presence of a witness, when in fact, the client signed it much earlier and the witness was not present. After receiving the settlement funds, Dixon delayed payment to his client. Following disciplinary proceedings in Connecticut, Dixon acknowledged his misconduct and was suspended for nine months. The Board on Professional Responsibility recommended reciprocal discipline, suggesting a similar nine-month suspension in the District. As neither Bar Counsel nor Dixon contested this recommendation, the court imposed the suspension. In the District of Columbia, the Board found Dixon violated Rule 1.2(a) for failing to notify his client of the settlement and Rule 1.15(b) for not promptly delivering the settlement proceeds. Dixon has not submitted the required affidavit following his interim suspension, which will remain in effect until he does so. His nine-month suspension will commence once he files a satisfactory affidavit.