Legal Opinion
Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. Neely
West Virginia Supreme Court
Decided July 17, 1998No. 24011PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:1
This disciplinary proceeding was instituted by the complainant, Office of Disciplinary Counsel [hereinafter “ODC”] of the West Virginia State Bar against Roger D. Hunter and Richard F. Neely, members of the Bar. Mr. Hunter and Mr. Neely were charged with violating Rule 3.1 of the West Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct. Mr. Neely was also charged with violating Rule 4.4. However, the Lawyer Disciplinary Board [hereinafter “Board”] found that the ODC only proved that Mr. Hunter and Mr. Neely violated Rule 3.1.2 The Board recommends admonishment. Based upon our review of the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Susan Mary Kamen v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co., Patricia McDonald and Carol BuckhamCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1986
- Lieving v. HadleyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1992
- Committee on Legal Ethics of West Virginia State Bar v. BlairWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1984
- Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. CunninghamWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1995
- Committee on Legal Ethics of the West Virginia State Bar v. KarlWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1994
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. ArtimezWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2000
- Shaffer v. West Virginia Department of Transportation, Division of HighwaysWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2000
- Hinchman v. GilletteWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2005
- Hinchman v. GilletteWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2005
- Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. NeelyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1998