In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Kimmell
Oregon Supreme Court
1Per curiam
In this lawyer discipline proceeding, the Oregon State Bar (Bar) charged the accused with violating two disciplinary rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility: Disciplinary Rule (DR) 1-102(A)(2) (prohibiting commission of “criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness to practice law”); and DR 1-102(A)(3) (prohibiting “engaging] in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation”). The Bar also alleged that the accused violated ORS 9.527(1) (conduct justifying denial of Bar admission). A trial panel of the Disciplinary Board…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- In Re JonesOregon Supreme Court · 1997
- In Re Complaint of PiersonOregon Supreme Court · 1977
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of PhelpsOregon Supreme Court · 1988
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of CarstensOregon Supreme Court · 1984
- In Re Complaint as to Conduct of MurdockOregon Supreme Court · 1998
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of EadieOregon Supreme Court · 2001
- ESLAMIZARBoard of Immigration Appeals · 2004
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of PaulsonOregon Supreme Court · 2009
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of DavenportOregon Supreme Court · 2002
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of GustafsonOregon Supreme Court · 2002
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.