Legal Opinion

In Re Non-Member of State Bar, Van Dox

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided February 21, 2007No. SB-06-0121-DPublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BERCH, Vice Chief Justice.

¶ 1 We granted review in this disciplinary case to clarify the standard the Disciplinary Commission must apply when reviewing a hearing officer’s findings of fact and the definition of “knowledge,” as that term is used in the American Bar Association Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions. Because the Commission failed to properly defer to the Hearing Officer’s factual findings and misinterpreted the term “knowledge” in determining the appropriate sanction, we decline to impose the Commission’s recommended sanction of censure and instead impose a sanction of…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Parts and Electric Motors, Inc., an Illinois Corporation v. Sterling Electric, Inc., a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1989
  2. United California Bank v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1983
  3. Van Loan v. Van LoanArizona Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Matter of NevilleArizona Supreme Court · 1985
  5. In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, PappasArizona Supreme Court · 1988

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. In the Matter of Rachel R. AlexanderArizona Supreme Court · 2013
  2. In re Melvin FinkSupreme Court of Vermont · 2011
  3. In Re AbramsArizona Supreme Court · 2011
  4. In re Member of State BarArizona Supreme Court · 2010
  5. In re a Member of the State BarArizona Supreme Court · 2009

6 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