Legal Opinion

Matter of Hoover

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided October 4, 1989No. SB-88-0029-DPublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FELDMAN, Vice Chief Justice.

This case comes before us for final disposition following a previous hearing and remand to the Disciplinary Commission. See In re Hoover, 155 Ariz. 192, 745 P.2d 939 (1987) {Hoover I). Our jurisdiction over bar discipline is based on provisions of the Arizona Constitution, inherent authority, and procedural rules.1

FACTS

Hoover I sets forth the facts in detail. Respondent, a respected and successful attorney, suffers from bipolar manic depressive psychosis, which presently is in remission. While under pressure and work*531ing on a large real estate transaction,…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  2. Kenyon v. HammerArizona Supreme Court · 1984
  3. In re DayIllinois Supreme Court · 1899
  4. In Re KerseyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
  5. In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, PappasArizona Supreme Court · 1988

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Matter of RivkindArizona Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Matter of LevineArizona Supreme Court · 1993
  3. In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, LoftusArizona Supreme Court · 1992
  4. In Re the Discipline of EnnengaUtah Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Bertleson v. Sacks Tierney, P.A.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2002

5 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