Legal Opinion

Coppock v. State Bar

California Supreme Court

Decided March 3, 1988No. S001886PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

THE COURT

We review the recommendation of the Review Department of the State Bar Court that petitioner be ordered suspended from the practice of law for two years, that execution of suspension be stayed, and that petitioner be placed on two years’ probation on specified conditions including ninety days actual suspension and payment of restitution. The review department found that petitioner allowed a client to use his client trust account in a scheme to defraud the client’s creditors. We adopt the review department’s recommendation as to discipline.

I. Facts

Petitioner was admitted to…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Segretti v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Yokozeki v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Alberton v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Smith v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Doyle v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. SchraederSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2002
  2. Brookman v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  3. In Re YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Arm v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  5. In Re BillingsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990

22 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