Legal Opinion

Dudney v. the State Bar

California Supreme Court

Decided November 2, 1931No. Docket No. L.A. 13038PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPreston, J.

Proceeding to review an order of the Board of Governors of The State Bar of California recommending that petitioner be suspended from the practice of law in this state for a period of six months.

The local administrative committee, after a hearing upon charges duly preferred against petitioner, found him guilty of violation of rules 2, 3 and 10 of the Rules of Professional Conduct of The State Bar of California and of subdivisions 3 and 4 of section 287 of the Code of Civil Procedure. As the evidence shows unquestionably and without conflict a violation of said rules and statute by petitioner…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Marsh v. State Bar of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Smallberg v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  3. Townsend v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Howe v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Smith v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hallinan v. Committee of Bar ExaminersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Herron v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Dudney v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Hallinan v. Committee of Bar ExaminersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
  5. In Re KelleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API