In re Dempsey
Annotate this CaseIn re Dempsey (2005-519) [Filed 20-Dec-2005] -------------------------------------------------------------------- 84 PRB [Filed 20-Dec-2005] ENTRY ORDER SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2005-519 DECEMBER TERM, 2005 In re Brian P. Dempsey, Esq. } Original Jurisdiction } } } Professional Responsibility Board } } } PRB Nos. 2005.200, 2005.201 In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter: The respondent, Brian P. Dempsey, Esq., is a lawyer licensed to practice law in the State of Vermont. Disciplinary counsel and respondent have filed a stipulation with the Court, with attached exhibits, stipulating that respondent be transferred to disability inactive status, effective immediately, until further order of the Court. A hearing panel appointed by the Professional Responsibility Board has filed a report with the Court recommending that it adopt the stipulation. Based on the stipulation of the parties, and the hearing panel's report and recommendation, the Court finds that respondent currently suffers from a disability which adversely affects his ability to practice law. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 21.C of Administrative Order 9, the Court orders: 1. That respondent is transferred to disability inactive status, effective from the date of this order, until further order of the Court; 2. That respondent shall comply with the provisions of Rule 23 of Administrative Order 9; 4. That attorney John B. Webber, Esq. is appointed as trustee to inventory the files of respondent and to protect the interests, financial and otherwise, of respondent and his clients. FOR THE COURT: _______________________________________ Paul L. Reiber, Chief Justice _______________________________________ John A. Dooley, Associate Justice ______________________________________ Denise R. Johnson, Associate Justice ______________________________________ Marilyn S. Skoglund, Associate Justice ______________________________________ Brian L. Burgess, Associate Justice
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.