Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Morris

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided January 11, 1984No. Misc. (BV) No. 7, September Term, 1983PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

Bar Counsel, acting pursuant to the provisions of Maryland Rule BV9, filed a petition with us on behalf of the Attorney Grievance Commission seeking disciplinary action against Robert Carroll Morris IV, a member of the Bar of this Court. The petition alleged a violation of the Disciplinary Rules in connection with Morris’ representation of Addie Louise Martin in an automobile accident case and a violation of the Disciplinary Rules in connection with his representation of the estate of Wilbur Max Poynton.

Pursuant to Rule BV9 b we referred the matter for hearing to one of the judges of the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Bar Ass'n v. MarshallCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1973
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. BoehmCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1982
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. FlynnCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
  4. Riddleberger v. GoellerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1971
  5. Gradman v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1944

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. ATTORNEY GRIEV. COMM'N OF MARYLAND v. KempCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1994
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. RobersonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. HowardCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1984
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. HowardCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API