Legal Opinion

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Spencer

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided November 22, 2002No. OSB 00-49, 00-51; SC S49362PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Per curiam

In this lawyer disciplinary proceeding, the Oregon State Bar (Bar) charged the accused with violating three disciplinary rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility in two different matters. In the Slattum matter, the Bar alleged that the accused violated Code of Professional Responsibility Disciplinary Rule (DR) 1-102(A)(3) (engaging in “conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation”) and DR 7-102(A)(7) (counseling or assisting client in conduct that lawyer knows to be illegal or fraudulent). In the Gibson matter, the Bar alleged that the accused violated DR…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of HockettOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  2. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of WeidnerOregon Supreme Court · 1990
  3. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of DinermanOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  4. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of GustafsonOregon Supreme Court · 2002
  5. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of CoeOregon Supreme Court · 1987

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Crimson Trace Corp. v. Davis Wright Tremaine LLPOregon Supreme Court · 2014
  2. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of FitzhenryOregon Supreme Court · 2007
  3. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of HostetterOregon Supreme Court · 2010
  4. In re SpencerOregon Supreme Court · 2014
  5. In Re CarpenterOregon Supreme Court · 2004

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