Background
The Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland brought disciplinary proceedings against Timothy Iryan Moorehead, Jr., a Maryland attorney, alleging multiple violations of the Maryland Attorneys’ Rules of Professional Conduct and the Maryland Rules governing attorney conduct. The charged violations included Rule 19-301.15 (safekeeping property), Rule 19-308.1(a) (bar admission and disciplinary matters), Rules 19-308.4(a), (c), and (d) (misconduct), as well as Maryland Rules 19-403, 19-404, and 19-407(a), (b), and (d).
The parties reached an agreement and filed a joint petition proposing a one-year suspension stayed entirely in favor of one year of probation, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in a negotiated probation agreement. The Supreme Court of Maryland considered the joint petition and accepted the proposed disposition.
The Court’s Holding
The Supreme Court of Maryland ordered that Moorehead be suspended from the practice of law in Maryland for one year based on his violations of the cited Rules of Professional Conduct and Maryland Rules. The court stayed the suspension in full for a period of one year, subject to the terms and conditions of the parties’ probation agreement.
The court further ordered Moorehead to pay $1,033.50 to the Attorney Grievance Commission as reimbursement for costs associated with the disciplinary proceeding.
Key Takeaways
- Moorehead received a one-year suspension, stayed entirely in favor of one year of probation — meaning he may continue practicing law provided he complies with the probation terms.
- The violations found include mishandling of client property (Rule 19-301.15), misconduct (Rule 19-308.4), and failures related to disciplinary matters (Rule 19-308.1(a)).
- Moorehead must reimburse the Attorney Grievance Commission $1,033.50 in prosecution costs.
- Failure to comply with probation conditions could result in the stayed suspension being imposed.
Why It Matters
This order illustrates the Maryland Supreme Court’s use of stayed suspensions as a disciplinary tool that holds attorneys accountable while allowing continued practice under supervision. The negotiated resolution — a joint petition for a stayed suspension with probation — reflects a relatively common approach in attorney discipline matters where the conduct, though serious, does not warrant outright removal from practice.
Attorneys should note that violations involving client fund safekeeping (Rule 19-301.15) and candor in disciplinary proceedings (Rule 19-308.1) remain among the most scrutinized categories of professional misconduct. The cost-reimbursement component signals that the Commission will seek to recover investigative expenses even in negotiated resolutions.