Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Robaton

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided November 16, 2009No. Misc. Docket AG No. 21 September Term, 2008PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarbera, J.

The Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland (“Petitioner”), acting through Bar Counsel and pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-751(a), 1 filed a Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action against David M. Robaton, Respondent. On August 22, 2008, Bar Counsel charged Respondent with violating the following Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct (“MRPC”): 1.1 (Competence), 2 1.3 (Diligence), 3 3.3(a)(1) (Candor Toward the Tribunal), 4 5.5(a) (Unauthorized Practice of Law; Multijurisdictional Practice), 5 and 8.4(c) and (d) (Misconduct). 6 Pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-752(a), 7 we re ferred the…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. MooneyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GarfieldCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GoffCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SiskindCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. UgwuonyeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. CoppolaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2011
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. BartonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2015
  3. In Re Karl H.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  4. Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. SteinhornCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2018
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. LitmanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2014

1 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