Legal Opinion
In Re Morganstern
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 17, 1923No. Crim. No. 967PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHouser, J.
On the first count, the third count, and the fourth count of an accusation against him, A. J. Morgan-stern was found guilty of violation of his duty as an attorney and counselor at law and of moral turpitude, dishonesty, and corruption, following which, by a judgment of the court, his permanent disbarment was ordered.
On the first count of the accusation it appears that appellant, acting as an attorney, was representing one Lewis H. Gilman, who was charged with murder; that under an agreement with Agnes Gilman, the wife of > said defendant, appellant received from her seven railroad bonds…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- City of Pasadena v. StimsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Deyoe v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Darcy v. Mayor of San JoseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- In re the Disbarment of BurnetteSupreme Court of Kansas · 1906
- Matter of DanfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Martin v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Marsh v. State Bar of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- Katz v. RosenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
- Stratmore v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- In Re MorgansternCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.