In re Lacome
── In re Lacome ──
Court: District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Date: May 07, 2026
Category: General
Notice: This order 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. 25-BG-0613
IN RE JOSEPH LACOME,
Respondent.
A Suspended Member of the Bar of the
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Bar Registration No. 995071 DDN: 2025-D092
BEFORE: Beckwith, Easterly, and McLeese, Associate Judges.
ORDER
(FILED – May 7, 2026)
On consideration of the certified order from the Arizona Supreme Court
suspending respondent for six months by consent with the additional condition that
he resign from the Arizona State Bar; this court’s July 3, 2025, order suspending
respondent pending this matter’s resolution and directing him to show cause why the
functionally equivalent discipline of a six-month suspension with a fitness
requirement should not be imposed; respondent’s response, in which he states that
he does not contest the proposed sanction; the statement of Disciplinary Counsel;
and respondent’s D.C. Bar. R. XI, § 14(g) affidavit filed August 14, 2025, it is
ORDERED that Joseph Lacome is hereby suspended for six months from the
practice of law in the District of Columbia, nunc pro tunc to August 14, 2025, with
reinstatement conditioned upon a showing of fitness. See In re Sibley, 990 A.2d 483,
487-88 (D.C. 2010) (explaining that exceptions to the rebuttable presumption in
favor of identical reciprocal discipline should be rare).
PER CURIAM
{# E23 (Nick, ruling section 1 answer 10): quoting a bill or a court opinion works
the way quoting a news article works. Select a passage above and the same panel
opens: the passage goes to the official you choose, with this document's own
address as its source and its own type. #}