Legal Opinion

In re Johnson

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 12, 2005PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Bar counsel filed a two-count petition for discipline with the Board of Bar Overseers (board), alleging that the respondent violated various disciplinary rules arising out of his representation of two clients. The allegations were deemed admitted, pursuant to S.J.C. Rule 4:01, § 8 (3), as amended, 430 Mass. 1314 (1999), and have not been challenged on appeal. In summary, the respondent deposited two checks issued by insurance companies for the benefit of his clients into his business checking account, rather than into either an IOLTA or designated trust account. He thereby commingled funds in…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. In the Matter of AlterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1983
  2. In re FinnMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2001
  3. In re SchoepferMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
  4. In re FoleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2003
  5. In the Matter of LuongoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1993

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. In re BarrettMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2006
  2. In re JohnsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008
  3. In the Matter of Edward A. SargentMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API