Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Au

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Electronically Filed Supreme Court 26517 22-FEB-2011 08:35 AM NO. 26517 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, vs. RONALD G.S. AU, Respondent. ---------------------------------------------------------------IN RE APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT OF RONALD G.S. AU, Petitioner. (ODC 95-242-4701, ODC 97-213-5407, 98-064-5555) ORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATION (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, J., Circuit Judge Crandall in place of Acoba, J., recused, Circuit Judge Trader in place of Duffy, J., recused, and Circuit Judge McKenna, assigned by reason of vacancy) Upon consideration of Petitioner Ronald G.S. Au s motion for reconsideration of the Supreme Court s January 10, 2011 order denying Respondent Au s application for reinstatement, the memorandum, exhibits, and declaration in support thereof, and the record, it is clear that Respondent Au was not charged with unauthorized practice of law under HRS §§ 605-2 and 605-14, but was confronted with evidence he practiced while suspended, a violation of Rule 2.17(a) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i (RSCH), and could not therefore prove compliance with all applicable disciplinary orders and rules, as required by RSCH Rule 2.16. The record is replete with Respondent Au s arguments on the subject, contrary to his contentions on reconsideration about notice and opportunity to be heard. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, February 22, 2011. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Virginia L. Crandall /s/ Rom A. Trader /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.