In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Glass
Oregon Supreme Court
1Per curiam
In In re Glass, 308 Or 297, 779 P2d 612 (1989), this court found the accused in violation of DR 1-102(A)(3) (engaged in conduct involving misrepresentation) 1 , DR 1-103(C) (failure to cooperate with a Bar investigation) 2 and DR 7-102(A)(1) (taking actions merely to harass or maliciously injure another). The accused was suspended from the practice of law for 91 days and was required to take and pass the Professional Responsibility Ethics Examination within one year.
The accused filed a petition for reconsideration, pointing out that DR 7-102(A)(1) applies only where the lawyer engages in one…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of HockettOregon Supreme Court · 1987
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of BrownOregon Supreme Court · 1984
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of GlassOregon Supreme Court · 1989
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of HoppOregon Supreme Court · 1981
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of HuffmanOregon Supreme Court · 1980
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Runsvold v. Idaho State BarIdaho Supreme Court · 1996
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of ReckerOregon Supreme Court · 1990
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of MilesOregon Supreme Court · 1996
- Barrett v. Virginia State BarSupreme Court of Virginia · 2006
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of StaarOregon Supreme Court · 1996
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.