Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Robertson

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided August 3, 2007No. Misc. Docket (Subtitle AG) No. 21 Sept. Term, 2006PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*622Opinion by

BELL, Chief Judge.

The Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland, the petitioner, by Bar Counsel, acting pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-751,1 filed a Petition For Disciplinary or Remedial Action against Bonar Mayo Robertson, the respondent. The petition charged, as a result of a complaint by Bar Counsel, that the respondent violated Rules 1.1, Competence,2 1.3, Diligence,3 1.4, Communication,4 5.5, Unauthorized Practice of Law,5 and 8.4, Misconduct,6 of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct, as adopted by Maryland Rule 16-812.

*623We referred the case, pursuant to Rules 16-752(a),7 to…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. AwuahCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GuidaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. MooneyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000
  4. State v. StanleyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1998
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. McLaughlinCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GisrielCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2009
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. KreamerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. McCullochCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. MixterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2015
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. TankoCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2012

21 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