Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Hockett

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 31, 1987No. 84-77; SC S32958PublishedCited by 47 opinions

1Per curiam

In this lawyer discipline case the accused was charged and found to have violated, inter alia, former DR 1-102(A)(4), presently DR 1-102(A)(3), (lawyer shall not engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation), DR 5-105(A) (conflict of interest) and DR 7-102(A)(7) (lawyer shall not assist client in conduct known to be illegal or fraudulent). We, too, find that the accused violated those rules and order that he be suspended from the practice of law for 63 days.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

DR 5-105 provided:

“(A) A lawyer shall decline proffered employment if the exercise of…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of HillerOregon Supreme Court · 1985
  2. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct JohnsonOregon Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Rice v. McAlisterOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Jolly v. KyleOregon Supreme Court · 1895
  5. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of BoyerOregon Supreme Court · 1983

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

3Cited by47 opinions

  1. State v. GallantOregon Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. MixterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2015
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. CulverCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004
  4. Reynolds v. SchrockOregon Supreme Court · 2006
  5. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of LeonardOregon Supreme Court · 1989

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

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API