Messing, Rudavsky & Weliky, P.C. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCordy, J.
I concur that the financial sanction levied against Messing, Rudavsky & Weliky, P.C., must be set aside, but do so for reasons different from those set forth in the court’s opinion. I disagree with the court’s interpretation of Mass. R. Prof. C. 4.2, 426 Mass. 1402 (1998), and its comment that became effective on January 1, 1998, and therefore dissent from its holding in that regard.
Rule 4.2. Whatever the merits of the interpretation that the court today gives rule 4.2, it is not consistent with the rule and the comment that we adopted in 1998, or its predecessor, S.J.C. Rule 3:07, Canon 7,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Niesig v. Team INew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- Wright v. Group Health HospitalWashington Supreme Court · 1984
- Loschiavo v. Port Auth. of New York & New JerseyNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- Ruszcyk v. Secretary of Public SafetyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1988
- Mompoint v. Lotus Development Corp.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1986
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.