Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. MacDougall

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided December 13, 2004No. Misc. Docket AG No. 59 September Term, 2003PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBell, C.J.

The Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland, the petitioner, by Bar Counsel, acting pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-751, 1 filed a Petition For Disciplinary or Remedial Action against Francis MacDougall, the respondent. The petition charged that the respondent violated Rules 1.3, Diligence, 2 1.4, Communication, 3 1.5, Fees, 4 1.16, Declining or Terminating Representation, 5 3.4, Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel, 6 8.1, Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters, 7 and 8.4, Misconduct, 8 of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct, as adopted by Maryland Rule 16-812. 9

We referred the case,…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GarlandCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GarfieldCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GoldsboroughCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
  4. Attorney Griev. Comm'n of Maryland v. Franz & LipowitzCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
  5. ATTORNEY GRIEV. COM'N OF MARYLAND v. HambyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1991

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. FrammCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2016
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SteinbergCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. MoellerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2012
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. MaignanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. BrisbonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005

1 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