Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Rees

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided December 20, 2006No. Misc. Docket AG No. 49, Sept. Term, 2005PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBell, C.J.

The respondent, Natalie H. Rees, was charged by the petitioner, the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland, in a Petition For Disciplinary Action, filed by Bar Counsel, acting pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-751, 1 with violating a number of the Rules of Professional Conduct, as adopted by Maryland Rule 16-812, and Maryland Code (2004 RepLVol., 2006 Cum.Supp.), § 10-306 of the Business and Occupations Article. Following a hearing, the Hon. Robert N. Dugan, of the Circuit Court for Baltimore County, to whom the Court referred the matter, see Rule 16-752(a), 2 to make findings of fact and draw…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. MonfriedCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  2. Maryland State Bar Ass'n v. PhoebusCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SteinCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
  4. Attorney Griev. Comm'n of Maryland v. Franz & LipowitzCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
  5. ATTORNEY GRIEV. COMM'N OF MARYLAND v. ProtokowiczCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1993

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GoffCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. CoppolaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2011
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. NussbaumCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. WhiteheadCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. TankoCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2009

29 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