Legal Opinion
In re Scannell
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided October 7, 1980No. OSB 79-23, SC 27093PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Per curiam
In disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Oregon State Bar, a trial board found the accused guilty of violating Disciplinary Rule 5-104(A), which provides:
"A lawyer shall not enter into a business transaction with a client if they have differing interests therein and if the client expects the lawyer to exercise his professional judgment therein for the protection of the client, unless the client has consented after full disclosure.”
There is no dispute about the facts constituting the violation, as set out below. The only issue is the determination of the penalty appropriate to the…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Matter of KotokSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1987
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of BoyerOregon Supreme Court · 1983
- Committee on Professional Ethics & Conduct of the Iowa State Bar Ass'n v. BarrerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1993
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of VaileOregon Supreme Court · 1985
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of O'ByrneOregon Supreme Court · 1985
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.