Legal Opinion

State v. Barto

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 14, 1930PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRosenuerry, C. J.

In recent years in a number of cases this court has had occasion to consider the necessary moral qualifications of those seeking a license to practice law or to continue in the practice where license has already been granted.1 It is not necessary for us to restate the matters set forth and fully considered in these cases. When a person enters upon the practice of the law he thereby assumes certain duties and obligations and is required to conform to certain standards in three principal relations: (1st) in his *331relation to his client; (2d) his relation to the- courts and fellow practitioners;…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Ex Parte WallSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  2. State v. CannonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
  3. In re StolenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1927
  4. State v. CannonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Armstrong v. MorrowWisconsin Supreme Court · 1917

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Herrscher v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  2. State v. RoggensackWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  3. State ex rel. Spillman v. PriestNebraska Supreme Court · 1932
  4. State v. KernWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Will of Jaeger v. LademanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935

12 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