In Re Lawrence R. Radanovic

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. 19-BG-586
IN RE LAWRENCE R. RADANOVIC, RESPONDENT.
A Member of the Bar
of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals
(Bar Registration No. 10413)
On Report and Recommendation of the Board on Professional
Responsibility Ad Hoc Hearing Committee
Approving Petition for Negotiated Discipline
(DDN 422-14)
(Decided: October 31, 2019)
Before THOMPSON and EASTERLY, Associate Judges, and STEADMAN, Senior
Judge.
PER CURIAM: This decision is non-precedential. Please refer to D.C. Bar R.
XI, § 12.1(d) regarding the appropriate citation of this opinion.
In this disciplinary matter, the Ad Hoc Hearing Committee (the Committee)
recommends approval of a petition for negotiated attorney discipline. See D.C. Bar
R. XI, § 12.1(c). The petition is based on respondent’s voluntary acknowledgement
that he undertook a joint representation without a fee agreement, failed to inform his
2
clients that a conflict of interest may arise out of the representation, and continued
representing both clients after a conflict arose, in violation of D.C. Rules of
Professional Conduct 1.5(b), 1.4(b), 1.7(b)(1), 1.9, and 1.16(a)(1). The proposed
discipline is a thirty-day suspension from the practice of law, stayed in favor of six
months of probation with conditions.
Having reviewed the Committee’s recommendation in accordance with our
procedures in uncontested disciplinary cases, see D.C. Bar R. XI, § 12.1(d), we agree
that this case is appropriate for negotiated discipline and that the proposed
disposition is not unduly lenient or inconsistent with dispositions imposed for
comparable professional misconduct. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that respondent Lawrence R. Radanovic is hereby suspended
from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for thirty days, with the
suspension stayed in favor of six months of probation subject to the following
conditions: that respondent shall not engage in any misconduct in this or any
jurisdiction during his probationary period and that he shall complete four hours of
ethics-related continuing legal education courses preapproved by Disciplinary
Counsel, and submit proof of attendance within thirty days of such attendance.
Additionally, respondent agrees that in the event his probation is revoked he shall
serve the full thirty-day suspension. We direct respondent’s attention to the
3
requirements of D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g) requiring respondent, if his probation is
revoked, to file an affidavit with this court in order for his suspension to be deemed
effective for purposes for reinstatement.
So ordered.