In Re Eva Vekos, Esq. (Office of Disciplinary Counsel)

Summary

The Vermont Supreme Court denied an attorney's motion for automatic reinstatement from an interim suspension imposed after a nolo contendere plea to DUI, holding that the trial court's striking of the adjudication of guilt under the deferred-sentence statute, 13 V.S.A. § 7041(e), was not a 'reversal' or 'vacatur' of the conviction required by Administrative Order 9, Rule 21(F). Relying on the Legislature's distinct usage of 'strike' and 'vacate,' dictionary definitions, and the distinction between expungement and vacatur, the Court concluded that automatic reinstatement requires a legal or factual deficiency in the underlying conviction, which was absent here. Associate Justice Nolan, concurring, agreed that respondent could not satisfy Rule 21(F) but renewed her disagreement with the underlying decision to suspend respondent's license before a merits hearing.