Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

In re Fordham

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided August 9, 1996PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Connor, J.

This is an appeal from the Board of Bar Overseers’ (board’s) dismissal of a petition for discipline filed by bar counsel against attorney. Laurence S. Fordham. On March 11, 1992, bar counsel served Fordham with a petition for discipline alleging that Fordham had charged a clearly excessive fee in violation of S.J.C. Rule 3:07, DR 2-106, as appearing in 382 Mass. 772 (1981), for defending Timothy Clark (Timothy) in the District Court against a charge that he operated a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor (OUI) and against other related charges.. Fordham moved that…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. In Re RuffaloSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  3. Gentile v. State Bar of Nev.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
  4. Cummings v. National Shawmut Bank of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933
  5. In the Matter of HissMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. In Re Disciplinary Proceeding Against HaleyWashington Supreme Court · 2006
  2. In re HilsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2007
  3. In re BrauerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008
  4. T & D Video, Inc. v. City of RevereMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2006
  5. In re the Discipline of an AttorneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2004

29 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