U.S. Lawyer Loses Disbarment Appeal After She Was Found Guilty of Stealing $1,100 From a Sleeping Passenger During a Flight to South Korea

A U.S. attorney has lost her appeal against being disbarred from practicing law in the district of Colombia after she was convicted of stealing $1,100 in cash from a sleeping passenger during a flight to South Korea.

The case dates back to 2007 when the lawyer was the partner of a law firm where she practised immigration law. It was during this time that she was accused of theft by another passenger on a flight to the South Korean capital Seoul.

A local court heard how a flight attendant onboard the plane had allegedly witnessed the woman going through the other passenger’s purse. The passenger had boarded the plane with at least $1,500 in cash, but when she checked her purse, only four $100 bills remained.

The inflight purser confronted the woman and examined the cash in her purse, discovering that the serial numbers of some of the bills were sequential to the bills that remained in the victim’s purse.

On arrival in South Korea, the suspect was taken away by police and questioned. After providing a statement, the woman was released and later charged with theft. When she initially failed to appear at her trial, the court issued a default ruling against her.

After learning of her default conviction, the woman requested a formal trial and was again found guilty of theft. She appealed the ruling and submitted bank documents that Maryland’s Attorney Grievance Commission alleged were forged.

During a Hearing Committee, more than 20 witnesses were called to provide evidence over seven days, and more than 100 exhibits were submitted. The committee concluded that the woman had not only committed the theft but had also forged bank employee letters and several checks.

The verdict was appealed, but following a years-long process, the DC Court of Appeals ruled that the woman’s disbarment stands.

“In this case, we conclude that disbarment is warranted based on [the woman’s] theft and repeated and pervasive dishonesty,” the judgment read.

The full ruling can be read here (PDF link).