In re Kurtyka ( 2024 )

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the
Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound
volumes go to press.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS
No. 24-BG-0785
In re BRIAN M. KURTYKA,
DDN:066-2024
A Suspended Member of the Bar of the
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Bar Registration No. 440410BEFORE: Easterly, McLeese, and Shanker, Associate Judges.
ORDER
(FILED—October 31, 2024)
On consideration of the certified order from the Supreme Court of Maryland
disbarring respondent from the practice of law by consent; this court’s August 28,
2024, order suspending respondent pending disposition of this matter and directing
him to show cause why reciprocal discipline should not be imposed; and the
statement of Disciplinary Counsel requesting that reinstatement be conditioned upon
respondent’s reinstatement in Maryland; and it appearing that respondent has not
filed a response or his D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g) affidavit; and it further appearing that
respondent has not opposed Disciplinary Counsel’s proposed reinstatement
condition; and it further appearing that respondent was convicted of embezzlement
and forgery, it is
ORDERED that Brian M. Kurtyka is hereby disbarred from the practice of
law in the District of Columbia with reinstatement conditioned upon his
reinstatement in Maryland. See In re Sibley, 990 A.2d 483, 487-88 (D.C. 2010)
(explaining that there is a rebuttable presumption in favor of imposition of identical
discipline and exceptions to this presumption should be rare); In re Fuller, 930 A.2d
194, 198 (D.C. 2007) (explaining that a rebuttable presumption of identical
reciprocal discipline applies unless one of the exceptions is established); see also In
re Gonzalez, 318 A.3d 1208, 1219 (D.C. 2024) (where respondent acquiesced,
imposing requirement of reinstatement in New Jersey in addition to proof of fitness
in the District of Columbia). It is
No. 24-BG-0785
FURTHER ORDERED that, for purposes of reinstatement, Mr. Kurtyka’s
disbarment will not begin to run until such time as he files an affidavit that fully
complies with the requirements of D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g).
PER CURIAM