Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Mininsohn

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided March 17, 2004No. 70, Sept. Term, 2002PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBattaglia, J.

The Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland (“Petitioner” or “Bar Counsel”), acting through Bar Counsel and pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-751^), 1 filed a petition for disciplinary or remedial action against respondent, Gary S. Mininsohn, Esquire, on October 23, 2002. The Petition alleged that Mininsohn, who was admitted to the Bar of this Court on June 25, 1975, violated several Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct, specifically 1.3 (Diligence), 2 1.4 (Comm unication), 3 1.15 (Safekeeping property), 4 1.5 (Fees), 5 3.4 (Fairness to opposing party and counsel), 6 and 8.4 (Misconduct). 7…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. AwuahCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. McLaughlinCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. MonfriedCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GarfieldCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  5. ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COM'N OF MARYLAND v. AtkinsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000

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

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. Konvalinka v. Chattanooga-Hamilton County Hospital AuthorityTennessee Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2012
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. KremerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2013
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. CoppolaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2011
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. HodesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2014

40 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