Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Ruffin

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided May 16, 2002No. 15, Sept. Term, 2001PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BELL, Chief Judge.

This is a reciprocal discipline action arising out of disciplinary proceedings initiated in Arizona, where Victoria G. Ruffin, the respondent, a member of that bar, exclusively practiced law. The Arizona Disciplinary Commission having concluded in those proceedings that she violated certain of the Arizona Rules pertaining to professional conduct, as prescribed in Rule 42 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Arizona, “particularly ER 1.1 (competence), ER 3.1 (meritorious claims and contentions), ER 4.4 (respect for rights of third persons), ER 8.4(d) (misconduct prejudicial…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. RichardsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1998
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SabghirCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1998
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. ShawCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GittensCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. ParsonsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1987

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. WeissCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. WhiteheadCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. RobersonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SteinbergCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. ScroggsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005

8 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