Legal Opinion

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Gould

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided November 20, 2008No. 22239PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion of the Court by

MOON, C. J.

The Disciplinary Board of the Hawaii Supreme Court, pursuant to Rule 2.17(c) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii (RSCH), submitted its report and recommendation on September 26, 2008, recommending that Petitioner Burton D. Gould’s “Petition for Reinstatement be granted and that he be reinstated to the practice of law in the State of Hawaii.” For the reasons discussed below, we respectfully disagree with the Disciplinary Board’s recommendation.

The Disciplinary Board concluded that Gould—while suspended'—committed multiple violations of the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Birbrower, Montalbano, Condon & Frank v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  2. People v. Merchants Protective Corp.California Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Fought & Co. v. Steel Engineering & Erection, Inc.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Akinaka v. Disciplinary Board of the Hawai'i Supreme CourtHawaii Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Alt v. KruegerHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 1983

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. In the Matter of John M. SchumDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 2025
  2. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. AuHawaii Supreme Court · 2011
  3. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. TagupaHawaii Supreme Court · 2016
  4. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. TagupaHawaii Supreme Court · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API