Legal Opinion

In Re Storment

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided November 21, 2002No. 92832PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Kilbride

Central to our disposition of this case is the question of whether respondent violated Rule 1.5(g)(2) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (Code) (134 Ill. 2d R. 1.5(g)(2)) by sharing a fee with another lawyer when respondent was unable to assume the same legal responsibility for the conduct of the case as the lawyer receiving the referral. The Administrator of the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (ARDC) filed a complaint charging Paul M. Storment, Jr., respondent, with various violations of the Code. The Hearing Board (Hearing Board or Board) found that respondent…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. In Re Estate of RennickIllinois Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Eagan v. Chicago Transit AuthorityIllinois Supreme Court · 1994
  3. In Re VrdolyakIllinois Supreme Court · 1990
  4. In Re WittIllinois Supreme Court · 1991
  5. In Re TimponeIllinois Supreme Court · 1993

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Vision Point of Sale, Inc. v. HaasIllinois Supreme Court · 2007
  2. People v. MarkerIllinois Supreme Court · 2009
  3. People v. GarsteckiIllinois Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Ferris, Thompson & Zweig, Ltd. v. EspositoIllinois Supreme Court · 2018
  5. Peterson v. Berg (In Re Berg)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · 2008

21 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