Legal Opinion

In re Hoicka

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided June 10, 2004PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The respondent, David A. Hoicka, appeals from the judgment of a single justice of this court ordering that he be publicly reprimanded and that he pay costs to the Board of Bar Overseers (board).

Bar counsel filed a six-count petition for discipline with the board against the respondent alleging that he had violated various disciplinary rules arising out of his representation of clients A, B, and C during the period April, 1992, through at least October, 1993.1 After an eight-day hearing on the petition, a special hearing officer assigned by the board concluded that bar counsel had failed to…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. In the Matter of AlterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1983
  3. In the Matter of SaabMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
  4. Hill v. HallMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
  5. Langlitz v. Board of Registration of ChiropractorsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. In re DriscollMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2006
  2. In the Matter of StraussMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2018
  3. In re JohnsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
  4. In re CarnahanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2007
  5. In re the Discipline of an AttorneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2007

3 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