The way I read it, it appears she would have faced a derogatory hearing or complaint, and at the time she was suspended to practice law by the court because the complaint was very serious.
And Instead of facing the music in a court hearing, she voluntarily gave up her law license indefinitely.
I would love for a lawyer to explain exactly what it means. Is it innocent or not so much?????????
LAWYERS..................please explain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That’s a distinct possibility, Red. It’s why I’d like an IL lawyer to interpret what the boxes mean. Bar requirements vary from state to state.
It may be that in IL, lawyers are required to carry malpractice insurance (like some states require auto insurance on vehicles or at least be part of a state pool for the uninsured). Those professional liability premium rates would be determined by any claims or disciplinary proceedings made against a lawyer. Again, like auto insurance.
Because of that requirement (if it exists) in IL an attorney may have to file with the court and be granted the authorization to inactivate your license. I just don’t know.
I do think we have to be careful to separate the wheat from the chaff. There has been way too much speculation and too many dead ends pursued about both Obamas. IMO, this should be nailed down as to what ‘voluntary’ and ‘court ordered’ inactivation means.
As fate would have it, my former brother in law is a member of the IL bar, so I looked up his record for a comparison to MO. He’s retired but is still a member of the bar, not inactive, but it says he can’t practice law there because he hasn’t met some CLE requirements. I guess that memo didn’t reach him on the golf course. There is nothing in his record, tho, about malpractice insurance, as there is for MO. That box isn’t even on his record at all. It could be because any mandate to carry malpractice insurance was implemented only for lawyers admitted after a certain date and the bil was admitted long before that.