Deborah Luxenberg

DCCA Opinion (December 7, 2017)

Summary: In re Deborah Y. Luxenberg. Bar No. 215657. December 7, 2017. The Board also has recommended that Ms. Luxenberg be suspended from the practice of law for six months due to her violation of Rules 1.3 (a), 5.1 (a), and 5.1 (c)(2), relating to the responsibility of partners in law firms to ensure competency and ethical behavior by attorneys in the firm.

DCCA Opinion (December 7, 2017)

Summary: In re Dorrance D. Dickens. Bar No. 450751. December 7, 2017. The Board on Professional Responsibility has recommended that Mr. Dickens be disbarred from the practice of law due to his violation of multiple rules of professional conduct, including Rule 1.15 (a) and (c),commingling and misappropriation, and Rule 8.4 (c), conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.

DCCA Order (October 3, 2016)

Summary: Dickens was suspended on an interim basis pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9(g), pending final action on the Board on Professional Responsibility’s July 28, 2016, recommendation of disbarment.

Board Report and Orders (July 28, 2016)

Summary: The Board on Professional Responsibility recommends the D.C. Court of Appeals suspend Luxenberg for six months. Luxenberg, who practiced law in the District of Columbia under the firm name Luxenberg & Johnson (later, Luxenberg, Johnsons & Dickens) employed Dorrance D. Dickens, who engaged in the theft of at least $1,434,298.50 from estates related to three different clients. The Board found that Luxenberg failed to make reasonable efforts to ensure that her law firm had measures in effect giving reasonable assurance that all lawyers in the firm conformed to the Rules of Professional Conduct; failed to take remedial action when she knew or reasonably should have known about Dickens’ failure to keep a client reasonably informed as to the status of her matter at a time when its consequences could have been avoided or mitigated; and failed to take remedial action when she knew or reasonably should have known about Dickens engaging in the practice of law in Maryland without a license to do so. Rules 1.3(a), 5.1(a), and 5.1(c)(2).

Board Report and Orders (July 28, 2016)

Summary: The Board on Professional Responsibility recommends the D.C. Court of Appeals disbar Dickens with restitution of $1,434,298.50 as a condition of reinstatement, with interest at the legal rate. This matter arises out of Dickens’ alleged theft of at least $1,434,298.50 from estates related to three different clients, while employed at the Luxenberg & Johnson (later, Luxenberg, Johnson & Dickens). 1.1(a), 1.1(b), 1.3(b)(1), 1.3(b)(2), 1.4(a), 1.4(b), 1.7(b)(4), 1.15(a)(misappropriation), 1.15(c), 8.1(b), 8.4(b), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d).

Hearing Committee Report (April 20, 2015)

Summary: Not yet available.

Hearing Committee Report (April 20, 2015)

Summary: Not yet available.