IN RE: MICHAEL C. WORSHAM, Respondent. Bar Registration No. 462830
BEFORE: Beckwith, Associate Judge, and King and Reid, Senior Judges.
On consideration of the certified order indefinitely suspending respondent from the practice of law in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, this court's April 3, 2014, order suspending respondent and directing him to show cause why reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, the response and respondent's affidavit as required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14 (g) filed on May 3, 2014, the statement of Bar Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline and request to stay the proceeding, this court's June 9, 2014, order staying the matter until resolution of the pending disciplinary matter in the state of Maryland, a certified order of the Court of Appeals of Maryland disbarring respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction, see Attorney Grievance Com'n of Maryland v. Worsham, 441 Md. 105, 105 A.3d 515 (Md. 2014), this court's January 26, 2015, order that vacated the stay and directed respondent to show cause why reciprocal discipline of disbarment should not be imposed, the statement of Bar Counsel, and respondent's lodged response to Bar Counsel that includes a request for oral argument, and it appearing that respondent does not rely on any of the established bases for challenging reciprocal discipline, see D.C. Bar R. XI § 11 (c), but is attempting to improperly re-litigate the discipline imposed by the state of Maryland, see In re Zdravkovich, 831 A.2d 964, 969 (D.C. 2003) (" Put simply, reciprocal discipline proceedings are not a forum to reargue the foreign discipline" ), it is
ORDERED that the Clerk shall file the lodged response of respondent. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that respondent's request for oral argument is denied. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Michael C. Worsham is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of ...