Legal Opinion
In Re Illuzzi
Supreme Court of Vermont
Decided September 4, 1992No. 91-515PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Per curiam
Respondent-attorney appeals the Professional Conduct Board’s conclusion that he violated three provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility and the Board’s recommended sanction of a six-month suspension from the practice of law. We conclude that the Board failed to adhere to the requirements of its procedural rules when it adopted a second hearing panel report that had not been submitted to respondent. We therefore remand the case to allow respondent to brief and argue before the Board on the basis of the second panel report.
Respondent was charged first with violating DR 7-104(A)(l)…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In Re RuffaloSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Mazza v. CavicchiaSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1954
- Sexton v. Supreme Court Committee on Professional ConductSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1988
- Estate of Vafiades v. Sheppard Bus ServiceNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1983
- Tulsa Classroom Teachers Ass'n v. State Board of EqualizationSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1979
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Hodgdon v. Mt. Mansfield Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1992
- In Re O'DeaSupreme Court of Vermont · 1993
- In Re IlluzziSupreme Court of Vermont · 1993
- Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board Vs. James M. BoxSupreme Court of Iowa · 2006
- Monceret v. Board of Professional ResponsibilityTennessee Supreme Court · 2000
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.