Legal Opinion

Marlowe v. State Bar

California Supreme Court

Decided September 8, 1965No. S. F. No. 22057PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This is a proceeding to review the recommendation of the Board of Governors of the State Bar that petitioner be suspended from the practice of law for six months.

A local administrative committee concluded that petitioner violated his oath and duties as an attorney and committed *306acts involving moral turpitude and dishonesty. It also decided that petitioner wilfully violated rules 4 and 8 of the Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of California. Rule 4 provides that, “A member of the State Bar shall not acquire an interest adverse to a client.” Rule 8 provides that a…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Arden v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Lantz v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  3. Fall v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Linnick v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
  5. Magee v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Trafton v. YoungbloodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Giovanazzi v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Clancy v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  4. Baranowski v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Silver v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974

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