Brigitte Adams

DCCA Opinion (August 30, 2018)

Summary: The D.C. Court of Appeals suspended Adams for six months, with all but 90 days stayed, provided that she consents to an 18-month period of probation, with conditions and with practice monitoring should she resume her practice during the probationary period. Within 30 days of the date of the Court’s order of discipline, Adams is directed to file with the Board a statement certifying that she accepts the conditions of probation and agrees that during the period of stayed suspension she (1) shall not commit any other disciplinary rule violations; (2) shall be evaluated by the D.C. Bar Lawyer Assistance Program and sign a limited waiver permitting that Program to confirm compliance with this condition and cooperation with the evaluation process; and (3) shall comply with any recommendations of the Lawyer Assistance Program, including but not limited to attending and completing additional psychotherapy during some or all of the period of probation. Further, Adams is removed from all panel lists for court-appointed counsel in Superior Court and the Court of Appeals. The Rule violations arose in connection with Adams’s representation of five different clients pursuing appeals of their criminal convictions. Adams had accepted appointment by the D.C. Court of Appeals to represent each of these clients pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act. During a period from late 2009 or early 2010 until the end of September 2010, Adams effectively abandoned the five criminal appeal clients, failing to communicate with them, failing to pursue their appeals, missing briefing and filing deadlines, and failing to comply with multiple orders from the Court. In late September and early October 2010, the Court vacated Adams’s appointment in each of the five cases, appointed successor counsel, and ordered Adams to transfer the case files to new counsel forthwith. Adams failed to comply with the Court’s orders to transfer case files to successor counsel. In late 2010, Disciplinary Counsel commenced an investigation of Adams’s handling of the five cases, but Adams failed to respond to any inquiries, including subpoenas. (Rules 1.1(a), 1.1(b), 1.3(a), 1.3(b)(1), 1.3(c) 1.4(a), 1.4(b), 1.16(d), 3.4(c), 5.5(a), 8.4(d) and D.C. Bar R. XI, § 2(b)(3) and 2(b)(4))

Board Report and Orders (April 22, 2016)

Summary: The Board on Professional Responsibility recommends that the D.C. Court of Appeals suspend Adams for six months, with all but 90 days stayed, provided that she consents to a one-year period of probation with conditions. The Board recommends that, within 30 days of the date of the court’s order of discipline, Adams be directed to file with the Board a statement certifying that she accepts the conditions of probation and agrees that during the period of stayed suspension she (1) shall not commit any other disciplinary rule violations; (2) shall be evaluated by the D.C. Bar Lawyer Assistance Program and sign a limited waiver permitting the LAP to confirm compliance with this condition and cooperation with the evaluation process; and (3) shall comply with any recommendations of the LAP, including but not limited to attending and completing additional psychotherapy during some or all of the period of probation. See Board Rule 18.1(a), (c)-(d). If Disciplinary Counsel has probable cause to believe that Adams has violated any of the terms of probation, Disciplinary Counsel may seek to revoke Adams’s probation, pursuant to Board Rule 18.3. In addition, the Board recommends that the court direct that, if not an automatic consequence of her suspension, Adams be removed from all panel lists for court-appointed counsel in D.C. Superior Court and D.C. Court of Appeals, without prejudice to her ability to reapply to serve as court-appointed counsel once she has completed her term of suspension and probation. The Rule violations arose in connection with Adams’s representation of five different clients pursuing appeals of their criminal convictions. Adams had accepted appointment by the Court of Appeals to represent each of those clients pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act. During a period from late 2009 or early 2010 until the end of September 2010, Adams effectively abandoned the five criminal appeal clients, failing to communicate with them, failing to pursue their appeals, missing briefing and filing deadlines, and failing to comply with multiple orders from the court. In late September and early October 2010, the court vacated Adams’s appointment in each of the five cases, appointed successor counsel, and ordered Adams to transfer the case files to new counsel forthwith. Adams failed to comply with the court’s orders to transfer the case files to successor counsel. In late 2010, Disciplinary Counsel commenced an investigation of Adams’s handling of the five cases, but Adams failed to respond to any inquiries, including subpoenas. Rules 1.1(a), 1.1(b), 1.3(a), 1.3(b)(1), 1.3(c) 1.4(a), 1.4(b), 1.16(d), 3.4(c), 5.5(a), and 8.4(d) and D.C. Bar R. XI, §§ 2(b)(3) and (b)(4).

Hearing Committee Report (May 28, 2015)

Summary: Not yet available.