Reciprocal discipline and reciprocal disability inactive status

(a) Duty of disciplinary counsel to obtain order of discipline or disability inactive status from other jurisdiction. Upon being disciplined or transferred to disability inactive status in another jurisdiction, a lawyer admitted to practice in Delaware shall promptly inform ODC of the discipline or transfer. Upon notification from any source that a lawyer within the Court’s jurisdiction has been disciplined or transferred to disability inactive status in another jurisdiction, ODC shall obtain a certified copy of the disciplinary order and file it with the Board and with the Court. (b) Notice served upon respondent. Upon receipt of a certified copy of an order demonstrating that a lawyer admitted to practice in Delaware has been disciplined or transferred to disability inactive status in another jurisdiction, the Chair or Vice Chair of the Board shall forthwith issue a notice directed to the lawyer or to counsel containing: (1) a copy of the order from the other jurisdiction; and (2) an order directing that the lawyer or lawyer’s counsel inform the Board and the Court, within 30 days from service of the notice, of any claim by the lawyer or lawyer’[s] counsel predicated upon the grounds set forth in paragraph (d), that the imposition of the identical discipline or disability inactive status in this State would be unwarranted and the reasons therefor. (c) Effect of stay of discipline or transfer in other jurisdiction. In the event the discipline imposed or transfer in the other jurisdiction has been stayed there, any reciprocal discipline imposed or transfer in this State may be deferred until the stay expires. (d) Discipline to be imposed or transfer to disability inactive status. Upon the expiration of 30 days from the service of the notice pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b), the Board shall recommend to the Court that it shall impose the identical discipline or disability inactive status unless counsel or the lawyer demonstrates, or the Court finds that upon the face of the record on which the discipline is predicated it clearly appears that: (1) the procedure was so lacking in notice or opportunity to be heard as to constitute a deprivation of due process; (2) there was such infirmity of proof establishing the misconduct as to give rise to the clear conviction that the Court could not, consistent with its duty, accept as final the conclusion on that subject; (3) the imposition of the same discipline by the Court would result in grave injustice; or (4) the misconduct established warrants substantially different discipline or no discipline in this State; or (5) the reason for the original transfer to disability inactive status no longer exists. If the Court determines that any of those elements exists, the Court shall enter such other order as it deems appropriate. (e) Conclusiveness of adjudication in other jurisdiction. In all other aspects, a final adjudication in another jurisdiction that a lawyer has been guilty of misconduct shall establish conclusively the misconduct for purposes of a disciplinary proceeding in this State. History. Amended, Dec. 23, 2003; effective May 14, 2008.