Legal Opinion

Van Sloten v. State Bar

California Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1989No. S006864PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

THE COURT.

We review the unanimous recommendation of the Review Department of the State Bar (the department) that petitioner Richard Ross Van Sloten (Van Sloten) be suspended from the practice of law for two years, stayed on the condition that he be placed on probation for two years, for failing to perform the legal services for which he was retained.

By a notice to show cause dated November 20, 1985, Van Sloten was charged in one count with violating his oath and duties as an attorney, as established by Business and Professions Code sections 6068 1 and 6103, 2 and of wilfully violating…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. In Re RuffaloSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Emslie v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  3. In Re FergusonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Yokozeki v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  5. Chefsky v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Calvert v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Edwards v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  3. In Re NaneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Hartford v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  5. In Re BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995

15 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