Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

In re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against Schafer

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 17, 2003No. 08652-4PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBridge, J.

“[We] cannot tolerate for a moment, neither can the profession, neither can the community, any disloyalty on the part of a lawyer to his client. In all things he must be true to that trust, or, failing it, he must leave the profession.”1

*154I

On August 12, 1992, William Hamilton contacted his attorney, Douglas Schafer, requesting assistance in forming a corporation to purchase a bowling alley from the estate of Charles Hoffman. Schafer and Hamilton met on August 17, 1992 to discuss the formation of the corporation. During either the August 12 or 17 conversation, Hamilton informed Schafer that…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  2. United States v. ZolinSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. Clark v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  4. Hunt v. BlackburnSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  5. In Re RosierWashington Supreme Court · 1986

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. In Re Disciplinary Proc. Against LongacreWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Association of Washington Business v. Department of RevenueWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  3. In Re Disciplinary Proc. Against BotimerWashington Supreme Court · 2009
  4. In re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against BotimerWashington Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Matter of Disciplinary Proceeding Against SchaferWashington Supreme Court · 2003

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API