Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

In Re Lawrence

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided September 30, 2004No. OSB 99-85; SC S50543PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Per curiam

In this lawyer disciplinary proceeding, the Oregon State Bar (Bar) charged the accused with violating various disciplinary rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The trial panel concluded that the accused violated Disciplinary Rule (DR) 1-102(A)(4) (engaging in conduct prejudicial to administration of justice), DR 1-103(C) (failing to respond fully and truthfully to disciplinary authorities), DR 7-102(A)(3) (concealing or knowingly failing to disclose that which lawyer is required by law to reveal), and DR 7-104(A)(2) (giving advice to person not represented by lawyer), and twice…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Armatta v. KitzhaberOregon Supreme Court · 1998
  2. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of EadieOregon Supreme Court · 2001
  3. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of HawsOregon Supreme Court · 1990
  4. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of HillerOregon Supreme Court · 1985
  5. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of GustafsonOregon Supreme Court · 1998

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. In re Robert Lee Vogel, BPR 023374Tennessee Supreme Court · 2016
  2. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of EllisOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  3. In re MaurerOregon Supreme Court · 2018
  4. In re KlempOregon Supreme Court · 2018
  5. In re NisleyOregon Supreme Court · 2019

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

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API