Legal Opinion

In Re Moore

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided June 27, 2000No. 26,279PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

2Per curiam

{1} Pursuant to Rule 17-211 NMRA, this matter came before the Court for consideration of the recommendation of the hearing committee and the disciplinary board to accept a conditional agreement not to contest and consent to discipline tendered by Roger Moore. By the terms of the consent agreement, respondent agreed not to contest the charges that he had violated Rules 16-115(A) and (B), 17-204(A)(1), (2), and (4) through (7), and 16-804(H). For the reasons that follow, we accept the recommendation and impose the discipline to which respondent agreed.

{2} This matter began with a…

3Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Romero v. EarlNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Matter of RawsonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Matter of RohrNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Matter of RuybalidNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Matter of HamarNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1997

4Cited by7 opinions

  1. Accident & Injury Medical Specialists, P.C. v. MintzSupreme Court of Colorado · 2012
  2. Yorgan v. DurkinWisconsin Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Quality Chiropractic, PC v. Farmers InsuranceNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2002
  4. Riegleman v. KriegCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2004
  5. In Re DawsonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2000

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

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

Powered by the Exa API