Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Zuckerman

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided March 17, 2008No. Misc. Docket AG No. 7 September Term, 2007PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DALE R. CATHELL

Judge (retired, specially assigned).

Pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-751, 1 the Attorney Grievance Commission (the “Commission” or “Bar Counsel”), acting through Bar Counsel, filed a petition for disciplinary action or remedial action against Charles Zuckerman (“respondent”) on April 26, 2007. He is charged with professional misconduct, as defined by Maryland Rule 16—701(i), 2 through violations of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct (“MRPC”), specifically, Rule 1.1 (Competence), 3 1.3 (Diligence), 4 1.15(d) (Safekeeping Property), 5 5.3 (Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GlennCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1996
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. ZuckermanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. McLaughlinCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  4. Maryland State Bar Ass'n v. PhoebusCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. PowellCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. FoltzCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2009
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GarciaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2009
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. McClainCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GisrielCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2009
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. BrigermanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2014

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API