Legal Opinion

McGrath v. State Bar

California Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1943No. S. F. 16835PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.-

— By an order to show cause issued on November 24, 1941, petitioner was charged with professional misconduct. A hearing was scheduled before a local administrative committee of The State Bar on February 3, 1942, and the complaining witnesses, Edna Darambouro and her son-in-law, Dave Greenblat, were subpoenaed to appear. Because of their late arrival at the first hearing they could not be heard. Two continuances were ordered by the committee to enable them to testify, but they failed each time to appear. Petitioner, however, appeared and testified, and upon his stipulation that the…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Marsh v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Lantz v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  3. Waterman v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Herron v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Bruns v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Trafton v. YoungbloodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Zitny v. State Bar of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
  3. Bernstein v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Arden v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  5. Bluestein v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974

7 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