Legal Opinion
In Re Meyerson
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Decided May 27, 1948No. [No. 145, October Term, 1947.]PublishedCited by 61 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMarkell, J.
This is an appeal from an order of the Supreme Bench of Baltimore City denying an application of a disbarred lawyer for reinstatement. Code 1939, Art. 10, secs. 22, 17.
Whether the Legislature could compel the courts to reinstate a pardoned convict or any other disbarred lawyer if he is not in fact a proper person to be permitted to practice, is a question not presented. The Act of 1937, ch. 370, (Art. 10, sec. 22) purports to require reinstatement only if the court shall be satisfied that the applicant is “worthy of reinstatement.” Art. 10, sec. 3, authorizes admission to practice only if…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Ex Parte WallSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Raffel v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Ex Parte SecombeSupreme Court of the United States · 1857
- Rheb v. Bar Ass'n of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1946
- In Re StumpCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1938
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by61 opinions
- Konigsberg v. State Bar of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Maryland State Bar Ass'n v. AgnewCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1974
- Hallinan v. Committee of Bar ExaminersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- Maryland State Bar Ass'n v. PhoebusCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
- In Re the Application of Allan S.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.