Legal Opinion

In Re Ripley

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided May 4, 1937PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtButtles, J.

This matter comes here on presentment to this court by the attorney general wherein it is charged that Austin Ripley of the City of Barre is guilty of contempt of this Court for that, never having received the oath of an attorney at law in any court in this state, the said Ripley has intruded himself in the office of an attorney of this Court and has wrongfully pretended to the office of an attorney of this Court and has engaged, between the dates therein stated, in the unauthorized practice of the law at the City of Rutland and the City of Barre, in the State of Vermont. Said presentment…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Illinois State Bar Ass'n v. Peoples Stock Yards State BankIllinois Supreme Court · 1931
  2. In Re DuncanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1909
  3. Eley v. MillerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1893
  4. In Re MorseSupreme Court of Vermont · 1924
  5. RICH. ASS'N OF MEN v. Bar Ass'nSupreme Court of Virginia · 1937

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Nelson v. SmithUtah Supreme Court · 1944
  2. State Ex Rel. Wright v. HinckleNebraska Supreme Court · 1940
  3. In Re WelchSupreme Court of Vermont · 1962
  4. LVNV Funding v. TriceAppellate Court of Illinois · 2011
  5. In Re FlintSupreme Court of Vermont · 1938

4 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