Free Motion for Order of Discipline - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:02-gp-00021-PCD

Document 8

Filed 01/06/2005

Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT : No. 3:02 GP 21 PCD GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT : : OF CONNECTICUT : : : JANUARY 5, 2005 VS. : : JAMES EDMUND BAKER

MOTION FOR IMPOSITION OF DISCIPLINE The Petitioner, the Grievance Committee for the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, hereby moves that a default enter against Respondent, James Edmund Baker, for his failure to respond to the Presentment filed in this matter. The Petitioner further requests that this Court suspend Respondent for the conduct for which Respondent was initially suspended by the Superior Court for the State of Connecticut. In support of this Motion, Petitioner submits the following: 1. James Edmund Baker, Respondent, is an attorney-at-law, having been duly

admitted to the Bar of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut on March 2, 1990. 2. 3. On October 18, 1990, Respondent was duly admitted to the Florida Bar. By decision dated January 31, 2002, the Supreme Court of Florida suspended

Respondent from the practice of law for ninety-one (91) days, and ordered him to successfully complete a Professional Enhancement Program prior to reinstatement for conduct arising out of signing his wife's name to several legal documents in connection with their home without her consent and requesting his secretary to notarize the forged signatures. A copy of the Judgment of

71263547_1.DOC 099985-01009 January 5, 2005 4:10 PM

Case 3:02-gp-00021-PCD

Document 8

Filed 01/06/2005

Page 2 of 4

the Supreme Court of Florida dated January 31, 2002 was previously made a part of this Court's file as Exhibit A of the Presentment in this case. 4. By Order dated November 5, 2002, the Superior Court for the State of Connecticut,

pursuant to an application of the Statewide Grievance Committee, granted an order of reciprocal discipline, suspending Respondent for ninety-one (91) days and providing that he may be reinstated on proof that he had been reinstated in Florida. A copy of the Court's Order was attached as Exhibit B to the Presentment in this case. 5. By Order dated September 4, 2003, the Supreme Court of Florida reinstated

Respondent. A copy of the Court's Order was attached as Exhibit C to the Presentment in this case. 6. By order dated January 28, 2004, the Superior Court for the State of Connecticut

reinstated Respondent. A copy of the Court's Order was attached as Exhibit D to the Presentment in this case. 7. Under Local Rule 83.2(f), when an attorney is disciplined from the bar of the courts

of Connecticut, counsel for the Grievance Committee must institute a presentment in the manner specified in paragraph (d) of Rule 83.2 petitioning this Court to require the resignation of the attorney. 8. By Presentment dated August 24, 2004, counsel for the Federal Grievance

Committee instituted the Presentment prescribed by Local Rule 83.2(f) praying that a Rule issue to James Edmund Baker to answer the Presentment and to appear and show cause why he should not be suspended from the bar of this Court for ninety-one (91) days or otherwise disciplined for the reasons set forth therein and that such proceeding be had on the Presentment as is provided for in Local Rule 83.2(c), (d) and (f).

71263547_1.DOC 099985-01009 January 5, 2005 4:10 PM

-2-

Case 3:02-gp-00021-PCD

Document 8

Filed 01/06/2005

Page 3 of 4

9.

By Order to Show Cause dated October 28, 2004, the Court (Dorsey, J.) ordered

James Edmund Baker to answer the Presentment within thirty (30) days of service upon him of the Order to Show Cause, showing cause why discipline should not be imposed and further ordering that a hearing on the matter be held on the 13th day of December, 2004, at 10:00 a.m. 10. The Clerk of this Court sent notice of said Order to Show Cause to the Respondent

by certified, return receipt mail, using the last known address contained in the Court's records. The Clerk received a return receipt card, dated November 15, 2004. 11. The Respondent has not filed an Answer to the Presentment, as ordered by the

Court in its Order to Show Cause dated October 28, 2004. Accordingly, the Petitioner respectfully requests that the Court enter a default against the Respondent for his failure to comply with the Court's October 28, 2004 Order and enter an Order imposing discipline on James Edmund Baker. Specifically, Respondent James Edmund Baker should be suspended for ninety-one (91) days, concurrent with the Order of the Connecticut Superior Court, as the reciprocal discipline provided for in Local Rule 83.2(c), (d) and (f). Dated at Stamford, Connecticut, this 5th day of January, 2005. THE GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE FOR THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

By ____________________________________ Stanley A. Twardy, Jr., Its Counsel Its Counsel Day, Berry & Howard, LLP One Canterbury Green Stamford, CT 06901 Telephone: 203-977-7300 Facsimile: 203-977-7301 [email protected]

71263547_1.DOC 099985-01009 January 5, 2005 4:10 PM

-3-

Case 3:02-gp-00021-PCD

Document 8

Filed 01/06/2005

Page 4 of 4

71263547_1.DOC 099985-01009 January 5, 2005 4:10 PM

-4-