Legal Opinion
Palomo v. State Bar
California Supreme Court
Decided September 6, 1984No. L.A. 31816PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
THE COURT.
The Review Department of the State Bar Court recommends that Raul Palomo be suspended from the practice of law for one year, with the suspension stayed on conditions of probation.
Petitioner was admitted to practice law in 1974. He has one instance of prior discipline; in 1980, he stipulated to public reproval for wilful violation of rules 2-111 (delivery of client files) and 5-101 (unethical business dealings with client) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Here, the hearing panel sustained allegations that petitioner “wilfully” violated his oath and duties as an attorney…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Crooker v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- People v. CrovediCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- Maxwell v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- Yokozeki v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Himmel v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Morris v. Ohio Casualty InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. SchraederSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2002
- Beery v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
- Lawhorn v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
- Waysman v. State Bar of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.