History
  • No items yet
midpage
In RE: Christopher L. Malcolm, Attorney Discipline Proceedings
1:24-mc-91525
D. Mass.
Dec 18, 2024
Check Treatment
Docket

*1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS In re: CHRISTOPHER L. MALCOLM. *

*

* Misc. Business Docket * No. 1:24-mc-91525-IT *

* ORDER RE: MOTION [DOC. NO. 5-1]

December 18, 2024

TALWANI, D.J.

Pending before the court is Attorney Christopher Malcolm’s Motion [Doc. No. 5-1] seeking certain relief in this disciplinary proceeding. Malcolm has not demonstrated entitlement to the requested relief, but the court nonetheless grants relief as follows.

This court’s October 21, 2024 Order to Show Cause [Doc. No. 3] required Malcolm to file a written response within 28 days of service. The Order was served the same date, meaning Malcolm’s response was due by November 18, 2024. Malcolm’s pending Motion [Doc. No. 5-1] seeking additional time and requesting a hearing is dated November 21, 2024, and was filed on December 2, 2024. Accordingly, it is untimely. In the Motion [Doc. No. 5-1], Malcolm requested, inter alia, a preliminary hearing. The court set the matter for a preliminary hearing for December 18, 2024. See Elec. Notice of Preliminary Hearing [Doc. No. 7]. Attorney Malcolm failed to appear.

Despite the untimely filing and Malcolm’s failure to appear for the requested preliminary hearing, in light of the gravity of the potential discipline, see Local Rule 83.6.4, the court grants the following relief. As requested, the deadline for Malcolm to file a formal response to the court’s October 21, 2024 Order to Show Cause concerning the matter referred by Judge Sorokin *2 is extended to December 30, 2024, [1] and Malcolm will be provided a hearing on the merits and as to the nature of discipline to be imposed. The court shall set that hearing for January 2, 2025.

IT IS SO ORDERED. December 18, 2024 /s/ Indira Talwani United States District Judge

[1] Malcolm shall file his response by electronic means. See Local Rule 5.4. If he seeks leave to file portions of his response under seal, both a motion for leave to file under seal, setting forth good cause for the requested impoundment, and a redacted copy of the response must be filed by electronic means. 2

Case Details

Case Name: In RE: Christopher L. Malcolm, Attorney Discipline Proceedings
Court Name: District Court, D. Massachusetts
Date Published: Dec 18, 2024
Docket Number: 1:24-mc-91525
Court Abbreviation: D. Mass.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.