Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Terrie Chun

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAII


July 19, 2011

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL,
PETITIONER,
v.
TERRIE CHUN,
RESPONDENT.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (ODC 11-031-8955)

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCAD-11-0000380 19-JUL-2011 11:01 AM

ORDER OF DISBARRMENT

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and McKenna, JJ.)

Upon consideration of the Office of Disciplinary

Counsel's petition for issuance of a reciprocal discipline notice to Respondent Terrie Chun, the memorandum, affidavit, and exhibits appended thereto, and the record, it appears the Supreme Court of California disbarred Respondent Terrie Chun from the practice of law in that state on July 30, 2009; this court, on June 1, 2011, issued a notice and order requiring Respondent Chun, in accordance with Rule 2.15(c) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii (RSCH), to show cause as to why the same or substantially equivalent discipline should not be imposed in the State of Hawaii; service of this court's notice and order is deemed effective June 2, 2011; and Respondent Chun has not appeared or shown cause as to why such discipline should not be imposed. It further appears that Respondent Chun is not within the State of Hawaii and that making this disbarrment order effective 30 days after its entry as provided by RSCH Rule 2.1(c) would serve no purpose. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.15(c), that Respondent Chun is disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Hawaii, effective upon entry of this order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in addition to any other requirements for reinstatement imposed by the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii, Respondent Chun shall pay all costs of these proceedings as approved upon timely submission of a bill of costs and an opportunity to respond thereto, as prescribed by RSCH Rule 2.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr. /s/ James E. Duffy, Jr. /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

20110719

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.