Attorney Grievance Commission v. Katz
429 Md. 308
| Md. | 2012Background
- Katz, Maryland attorney since 1983, pled guilty in 2010 to willful failure to file Maryland tax returns for 2004 and 2005.
- Judgment of conviction entered January 2011; sentenced to suspended prison terms, probation, restitution, and community service.
- On sentencing day, Katz settled with Maryland Comptroller for taxes and penalties 1992–2009, aside from the criminal years.
- Two months later, modification granted; sentence vacated and probation before judgment entered, with suspended sentence remaining.
- Virtually all other jurisdictions disciplined Katz (Virginia six-month suspension; various federal and D.C. actions), some reinstated, one case pending.
- Maryland Bar Counsel filed reciprocal discipline petition in March 2012 seeking discipline for the Maryland misconduct, Rule 16-773.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Maryland should impose reciprocal discipline or a different sanction | Katz: six-month reciprocal suspension should apply | Bar Counsel: six-month suspension appropriate; Katz: exceptions apply | Maryland may impose discipline other than identical reciprocal sanction |
| What sanction in Maryland is warranted for willful failure to file Maryland tax returns | Six-month suspension mirrors sister jurisdictions' action | MD precedent supports more substantial discipline due to circumstances | Indefinite suspension with right to apply for reinstatement |
| Are there exceptional circumstances warranting different discipline under Rule 16-773(e) | No grave injustice; similar discipline acceptable | Circumstances justify substantially different discipline in Maryland | Exceptional circumstances exist; not bound to identical sanction |
| Did Katz’s lack of fraudulent intent affect the sanction | No fraud found; six-month suspension appropriate | Lack of fraud does not preclude harsher discipline given context | Considerations of intent and case-specific factors support harsher sanction than six months |
Key Cases Cited
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Atkinson, 357 Md. 646 (2000) (willful failure to file tax returns can justify suspension; intent matters)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Breschi, 340 Md. 590 (1995) (six-month suspension for willful failure to file federal tax return)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. O’Toole, 379 Md. 595 (2004) (willful failure to file taxes with no fraudulent intent can lead to suspension)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Gilland, 293 Md. 316 (1982) (early tax-filing discipline; moral turpitude framework noted)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Walman, 280 Md. 453 (1977) (willful failure to file taxes is a dishonest act; moral turpitude discussion)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Tayback, 378 Md. 578 (2003) (motive affects severity in failure-to-file cases)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Gordon, 413 Md. 46 (2010) (reciprocal discipline framework; independently assess sanctions)
- Whitehead v. Attorney Grievance Comm’n, 390 Md. 663 (2006) (reciprocal discipline standards; discretion to impose corresponding discipline)
- Gordon (repeated entry for completeness), 413 Md. 46 (2010) (reciprocal discipline framework; independently assess sanctions)
- Angst v. Attorney Grievance Comm’n, 369 Md. 404 (2002) (dishonesty-related sanctions; emphasis on severity for deliberate misconduct)