Legal Opinion

Bruzga's Case

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided May 11, 1998No. LD-95-009PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BRODERICK, j.

We have accepted several questions transferred without ruling by a Judicial Referee {Dunn, J.), requiring us to determine whether and to what extent the doctrine of offensive collateral estoppel applies to attorney discipline proceedings. We conclude that it may apply when the burden of proof in a prior proceeding equals or exceeds the clear and convincing burden governing the disciplinary proceeding. For the reasons recited below, however, we hold that collateral estoppel does not apply in the present case, and remand.

The Superior Court {McHugh and McGuire, JJ.), approving the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Simpson v. CalivasSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1994
  3. In Re OwensIllinois Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Aubert v. AubertSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1987
  5. Basbanes' CaseSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1996

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. KiesewetterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  2. Commonwealth v. Two Parcels of LandMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2000
  3. Warren v. Town of East KingstonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2000
  4. In re WildeDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2013
  5. Tsiatsios v. TsiatsiosSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1999

3 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