In re Gilbert Baber, 106 A.3d 1072

In 2007 Darlene Gripper retained Gilbert Baber to handle her mother’s probate; retainer stated $125/hour plus expenses. Baber filed for unsupervised probate and Gripper was appointed personal representative.
Baber missed statutory deadlines (notice, publication, inventory), delayed filings, gave incorrect valuation advice, and billed Gripper for work attributable to his own neglect.
In 2008 Baber purportedly modified the retainer to take 5% of estate interest in one property; the property was not sold, Baber nevertheless demanded one-third of five percent of estimated proceeds and refused to provide an accounting.
Baber withdrew as counsel, accused Gripper of fraud in a probate pleading and later sued her in Superior Court; he made repeated false statements orally to the probate court and in filings, and refused to promptly return the client file or account for fees.
A Hearing Committee and the Board found numerous Rules of Professional Conduct violations (competence, diligence, communication, unreasonable fees, breach of confidentiality, false statements to court, interfering with administration of justice) and recommended discipline (Board: 3-year suspension + restitution; Hearing Committee: disbarment). The court accepted the factual findings and disbarred Baber, ordering restitution of $8,093.75 plus interest and conditioning reinstatement on payment and proof of fitness.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Were the Board’s factual findings of misconduct supported?	Findings are supported by record; misconduct shown.	Baber did not challenge findings before court.	Court accepted the Board’s uncontested findings.
Should Baber be suspended (per Board) or disbarred (per Bar Counsel)?	Bar Counsel: repeated, protracted dishonesty warrants disbarment.	Board: misconduct serious but not "flagrant dishonesty" warranting disbarment; recommended 3-year suspension.	Court held disbarment appropriate given repeated, prolonged, client-directed dishonesty and lack of remorse.
Was restitution required and in what amount?	Restitution to Gripper for fees/unjust charges.	Baber disputed charges and refused accounting.	Court ordered restitution of $8,093.75 plus interest as condition for reinstatement.
What conditions govern reinstatement?	Reinstatement only after affidavit under D.C. Bar Rule XI §14(g), proof of fitness, and restitution.	N/A — Baber offered no successful mitigation or contrition.	Court conditioned reinstatement on filing the Rule XI affidavit, demonstrating fitness, and paying restitution plus interest.

In re Vohra, 68 A.3d 766 (D.C. 2013) (Board recommendations normally afforded strong deference; sanction adopted unless inconsistent)
In re Howes, 52 A.3d 1 (D.C. 2012) (dishonesty and lack of moral fitness support disbarment)
In re Goffe, 641 A.2d 458 (D.C. 1994) (court may disbar despite Board recommendation of suspension where misconduct is blatant, protracted, and without contrition)
In re Omwenga, 49 A.3d 1235 (D.C. 2012) (prolonged, aggravated dishonesty supports disbarment)
In re Silva, 29 A.3d 924 (D.C. 2011) (isolated dishonesty may not warrant disbarment; context and duration matter)
In re Cleaver-Bascombe, 986 A.2d 1191 (D.C. 2010) (dishonesty in a single matter can warrant disbarment when material and followed by falsehoods to conceal it)
In re Pelkey, 962 A.2d 268 (D.C. 2008) (persistent, protracted, and flagrant dishonesty over years can warrant disbarment)