Legal Opinion · Dissent

In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona Redondo

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided October 21, 1993No. SB-92-0055-D. Disc. Comm. Nos. 88-1627, 89-0387, 89-0399, 89-0825, 89-1021, 89-1382, 89-1769, 89-2063, and 90-1359Published

1DissentCorcoran, Justice

I respectfully dissent. For a number of reasons, I agree with the Disciplinary Commission that respondent should be disbarred.

The majority considered each of respondent’s ethical violations in isolation and relied heavily on the fact that, under the American Bar Association’s Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, each type of ethical violation committed by respondent warrants suspension rather than disbarment. I think that this approach is misguided.

By considering each type of ethical violation in isolation, the majority overlooks the severity of respondent’s ethical violations, which…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, PappasArizona Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Matter of HooverArizona Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Matter of GaynesArizona Supreme Court · 1991
  4. In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, MulhallArizona Supreme Court · 1992
  5. In re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, EnganArizona Supreme Court · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API