Legal Opinion
In Re Complaint as to Conduct of Blaylock
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided April 15, 1999No. OSB 94-91; SC S43713PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Per curiam
In this lawyer disciplinary proceeding, the Oregon State Bar (Bar) charged the accused with violating Code of Professional Responsibility Disciplinary Rule (DR) 2-104(A) (permitting lawyer to initiate personal contact with prospective client for purposes of obtaining professional employment only under specified circumstances). A trial panel of the Disciplinary Board found that the accused had violated DR 2-104(A) and determined that he should receive a public reprimand. The accused sought review. ORS 9.536(1); Bar Rules of Procedure (BR) 10.1 and 10.3. Our review is de novo. ORS 9.536(3); BR…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- In Re ClaussenOregon Supreme Court · 1996
- In Re AllenOregon Supreme Court · 1997
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of BaerOregon Supreme Court · 1984
3Cited by11 opinions
- Van Westrienen v. Americontinental Collection Corp.District Court, D. Oregon · 2000
- State v. McCroreyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
- Simpson v. BurrowsDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2000
- Thompson ex rel. Thorpe Family Charitable Remainder Unitrust v. FedericoDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2004
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of AlbrechtOregon Supreme Court · 2002
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.