Legal Opinion

Hustedt v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

California Supreme Court

Decided December 7, 1981No. L.A. 31384PublishedCited by 70 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BIRD, C. J.

Does the separation of powers doctrine preclude the Legislature from granting to the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (Board) the power to discipline an attorney by temporarily or permanently prohibiting him or her from practicing before the Board? Does the Board have authority to proceed with the contempt action it instituted against petitioner?

I

Petitioner, Edward F. Hustedt, was admitted to the practice of law in this state on January 5, 1966.

In 1978, Hustedt was retained to represent a defendant employer in a compensation case pending before the Board. On or about…

2Cases cited44 opinions

  1. Buckley v. ValeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Ex Parte GarlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
  3. Bixby v. PiernoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  4. People v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  5. LeVesque v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970

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

3Cited by70 opinions

  1. In Re RosenkrantzCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Howard v. BabcockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
  3. State v. HolmesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Kasler v. LockyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Santa Clara County Counsel Attorneys Ass'n v. WoodsideCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994

65 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