Legal Opinion
In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Hedrick
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided February 24, 1971PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Per curiam
The accused member of the bar is charged by the bar with representing conflicting interests. Both the trial committee and the Board of Governors found the accused guilty. The accused denies the charge.
Rule 7 of the Rules of Professional Conduct provides:
“A member of the state bar shall not represent conflicting interests, except with the express consent of all parties concerned after a full disclosure of the facts, and then only when acting in the capacity of arbitrator. Within the meaning of this rule, a lawyer represents conflicting interests when, in behalf of one client, it is his duty to…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Unified Sewerage Agency Of Washington County v. Jelco IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Complaint to the HershbergerOregon Supreme Court · 1980
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of RobertsonOregon Supreme Court · 1981
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of ZafiratosOregon Supreme Court · 1971
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of HedrickOregon Supreme Court · 1986
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.