Legal Opinion

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Paulson

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided June 5, 2003No. OSB 00-105; SC S49826PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Per curiam

In this lawyer disciplinary proceeding, the Oregon State Bar (Bar) alleged that the accused had violated Code of Professional Responsibility Disciplinary Rule (DR) 2-106(A) by billing a client for time spent responding to the client’s complaint to the Bar against the accused. A trial panel of the Disciplinary Board concluded that the accused had violated DR 2-106(A) and imposed a public reprimand. The accused sought review of the trial panel’s decision. We review de novo. ORS 9.536(3); Bar Rule of Procedure (BR) 10.6. We also conclude that the accused violated DR 2-106(A) and impose a public…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Citizens & Southern National Bank v. Feimster (In Re Feimster)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia · 1979
  2. Schroeder v. SchaeferOregon Supreme Court · 1970
  3. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of StaufferOregon Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Schroeder v. SchaeferOregon Supreme Court · 1971
  5. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of MillerOregon Supreme Court · 1987

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Kenneth F. DolezalSupreme Court of Iowa · 2013
  2. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of PaulsonOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  3. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of SkagenOregon Supreme Court · 2006
  4. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of ObertOregon Supreme Court · 2012
  5. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of KnappenbergerOregon Supreme Court · 2008

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