Legal Opinion

Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court v. Hann

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided July 26, 2012No. Nos. 20110246, 20110247, 20110248PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Per curiam

[¶ 1] Attorney Camille O’Kara Hann objected to a report of a hearing panel of the Disciplinary Board recommending Hann be suspended from the practice of law and pay the costs of the disciplinary proceedings. We conclude there is clear and convincing evidence Hann violated N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.5(a), fees; 1.15(a) and (c), safekeeping property; 1.16(e), declining or terminating representation; 3.3(a)(1) and (3), candor toward the tribunal; and 8.4(c), misconduct. We order Hann be suspended from the practice of law for six months and one day and pay the costs of the disciplinary proceeding in…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. In Re Disciplinary Action Against LochowSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
  2. Barron v. CountrymanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2005
  3. Ryan v. Butera, Beausang, Cohen & BrennanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
  4. Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. PiazzaSupreme Court of Iowa · 2008
  5. In re SatherSupreme Court of Colorado · 2000

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court v. HoffmanNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Disciplinary Board v. HoffmanNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
  3. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court v. WardNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2016
  4. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of North Dakota v. McDonaghNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
  5. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State v. HoweNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2014

11 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