Background
Donnell H. McNeal, Esquire, a member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals (Bar Registration No. 974077), became the subject of disciplinary proceedings before the D.C. Board on Professional Responsibility. The matter was docketed as disciplinary case DDN: 2026-D023 / BDN: 26-BD-039.
Rather than contest the disciplinary charges, McNeal submitted an affidavit consenting to his own disbarment pursuant to D.C. Bar Rule XI, § 12(a). The Board on Professional Responsibility reviewed the matter, issued a report and recommendation supporting acceptance of the consent, and filed an unopposed motion asking the court to accept it. The Board also moved to file certain underlying documents—including McNeal’s consent affidavit and Disciplinary Counsel’s lodged motion—under seal.
The Court’s Holding
A three-judge panel of the D.C. Court of Appeals (Judges Easterly and Shanker, and Senior Judge Glickman) granted the consent to disbarment, formally disbarring McNeal by consent under D.C. Bar Rule XI, § 12(a). The court also granted the Board’s motion to place the underlying disciplinary documents under seal pursuant to § 12(c), directing the clerk to file those materials accordingly.
The court further directed McNeal’s attention to the obligations imposed on disbarred attorneys under D.C. Bar Rule XI—specifically the requirement to file a compliance affidavit under § 14 and the provisions governing eligibility for future reinstatement under § 16. The clerk was ordered to publish the order and transmit copies to McNeal, Disciplinary Counsel, and the Board.
Key Takeaways
- McNeal was disbarred by consent under D.C. Bar Rule XI, § 12(a) after submitting an affidavit agreeing to disbarment rather than litigating disciplinary charges.
- The court sealed the underlying disciplinary documents—including the consent affidavit and Disciplinary Counsel’s motion—pursuant to § 12(c), so the specific grounds for discipline are not part of the public record.
- As a disbarred attorney, McNeal must comply with Rule XI, § 14 (filing a required affidavit) and is subject to the reinstatement procedures set out in § 16.
Why It Matters
Consent disbarments allow attorneys facing serious disciplinary charges to avoid a contested hearing while still resulting in the most severe sanction the bar can impose short of criminal prosecution. This order illustrates the D.C. bar’s use of the consent mechanism and its accompanying sealing procedure, which protects some details of the underlying misconduct from public view while still making the disbarment itself a matter of public record.
Attorneys practicing in the District of Columbia should note that disbarment—whether contested or by consent—triggers affirmative post-disbarment obligations under Rule XI, § 14, and that reinstatement is governed by § 16’s separate and demanding procedural requirements.