Legal Opinion
In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Smith
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided July 10, 1990No. SB-89-0053-D, Disc. Comm. No. 5-1386PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CAMERON, Justice.
I. JURISDICTION
The Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Arizona (Commission) rec.ommends that' Russell Biddle Smith, III (respondent) be disbarred. The conduct in question occurred in 1981 and 1982, prior to the adoption of the Rules of Professional Conduct, effective on 1 February 1985. The former Code of Professional Responsibility therefore applies to respondent’s conduct. 1 2 See former Rule 29(a), 17A A.R.S. Sup.Ct. Rules (1981). We have jurisdiction pursuant to Ariz. Const, art. 6, § 5(3) and Rule 53(e), 17A A.R.S. Sup.Ct. Rules.
II. ISSUES
1. Was…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Matter of NevilleArizona Supreme Court · 1985
- In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, PappasArizona Supreme Court · 1988
- Matter of RivkindArizona Supreme Court · 1990
- Matter of WinesArizona Supreme Court · 1983
- In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona ZangArizona Supreme Court · 1988
3Cited by3 opinions
- Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. David M. NelsenSupreme Court of Iowa · 2011
- In Re Member of the Bar of the Supreme Court of DelawareSupreme Court of Delaware · 1991
- ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COM'N OF MARYLAND v. BereanoCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000