Legal Opinion
Disciplinary Counsel v. Parnoff
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided December 30, 2016No. SC 19535PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEspinosa, J.
**507In this appeal, we are asked to decide whether an attorney who knowingly appropriated client funds, but did not intend to do so wrongly, "knowingly misappropriated" those funds and is therefore subject to mandatory disbarment pursuant to Practice Book § 2-47A.1 The plaintiff, Disciplinary Counsel, appeals from the judgment of the Appellate Court, which affirmed the judgment of the trial court reprimanding **508the defendant, Laurence Parnoff, rather than disbarring him pursuant to § 2-47A. Disciplinary Counsel v. Parnoff , 158 Conn.App. 454, 482, 119 A.3d 621 (2015). The plaintiff…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- In Re WilsonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979
- Wiseman v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Potvin v. Lincoln Service & Equipment Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Commissioner of Social Services v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- PARNOFF v. MooneyConnecticut Appellate Court · 2011
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Meadowbrook Ctr., Inc. v. BuchmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2018
- Estela v. Bristol Hospital, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2018
- Mitchell v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2021
- Angelia Countryman v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2020