Legal Opinion
In re Thompson
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided July 18, 1997No. OSB 94-198; SC S43466PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Per curiam
In this lawyer disciplinary proceeding, a trial panel of the Disciplinary Board found the accused guilty of violating Disciplinary Rule (DR) 7-110(B) (prohibiting ex parte communication with the court on the merits of a pending case) and DR 1-102(A)(4) (prohibiting conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice) and imposed a public reprimand. The accused sought review. Bar Rules of Procedure (BR) 10.1 and 10.3. On de novo review, ORS 9.536(3) and BR 10.6, we find the accused guilty of violating DR 7-110(B) and DR 1-102(A)(4), and we suspend him from the practice of law for 63…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of HawsOregon Supreme Court · 1990
- Eagle Industries, Inc. v. ThompsonOregon Supreme Court · 1995
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of SchenckOregon Supreme Court · 1994
- Crow v. AbrahamOregon Supreme Court · 1917
- Haney v. Neace-Stark Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1923
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Iowa Supreme Court Board of Professional Ethics & Conduct v. RauchSupreme Court of Iowa · 2002
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of PaulsonOregon Supreme Court · 2006
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of LawrenceOregon Supreme Court · 2011
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of MerkelOregon Supreme Court · 2006
- Florida Bar v. Von ZamftSupreme Court of Florida · 2002
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.