The District of Columbia Court of Appeals has issued an indefinite suspension for attorney Marc S. Alpert. This decision follows a ruling from the Supreme Judicial Court for Suffolk County, Massachusetts, which placed Alpert on disability inactive status by consent. The court's order, filed on July 23, 2026, affects Alpert's ability to practice law in the District of Columbia.
This ruling is significant as it underscores how disciplinary actions in one jurisdiction can impact an attorney's standing in another. The court's decision reflects the principle of reciprocal discipline, meaning that if an attorney is disciplined in one state, similar action is often taken in others.
Background
Marc S. Alpert is a member of the bar in the District of Columbia, holding Bar Registration No. 196386. The current dispute arose when the Massachusetts court placed him on disability inactive status. This designation indicates that Alpert is unable to practice law due to a disability.
The D.C. Court of Appeals had previously issued a temporary suspension for Alpert on January 9, 2026. This suspension was pending the final outcome of the proceedings related to his status in Massachusetts. The court required Alpert to show cause as to why he should not face suspension in D.C. as well.
The Ruling
The court ruled that Alpert is indefinitely suspended from practicing law in the District of Columbia under D.C. Bar R. XI, § 13(e). The court stated, "respondent has not filed a response to the show cause order or his D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g) affidavit" and noted that he did not oppose the proposed conditions for reinstatement.
This ruling emphasizes the court's reliance on the principle of reciprocal discipline. The court referenced previous cases, stating that there is a rebuttable presumption in favor of imposing identical discipline. The opinion cited cases such as In re Sibley and In re Fuller, which establish that exceptions to this presumption should be rare.
Impact
The indefinite suspension of Marc Alpert means he cannot practice law in the District of Columbia until certain conditions are met. Specifically, his reinstatement will depend on his reinstatement in Massachusetts, as well as the filing of a required affidavit.
This ruling highlights the interconnectedness of state bar associations and the importance of maintaining ethical standards across jurisdictions. It also serves as a reminder for attorneys that disciplinary actions in one state can have far-reaching consequences in others.
What's Next
Alpert may appeal the court's decision, but details regarding any potential appeal were not provided in the court filing. There is no indication of any related cases pending at this time.