Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Fezell

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided October 13, 2000No. Misc. AG No. 34, Sept. Term, 1999PublishedCited by 76 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RAKER, Judge.

The Attorney Grievance Commission, through Bar Counsel, charged Howard J. Fezell, Respondent, with violations of Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1, Competence; 1 1.3, Diligence; 2 1.4, Communication; 3 3.2, Expediting Litigation; 4 and 8.1(b), Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters. 5 Pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-709(b), we referred the charges to Judge John H. Tisdale of the Circuit Court for Frederick County to conduct a hearing and make findings of fact and proposed conclusions of law.

I

Pursuant to an order of this Court, Judge Tisdale held an evidentiary hearing on…

2Cases cited41 opinions

  1. In Re RuffaloSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Spevack v. KleinSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SheridanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
  4. ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COM'N OF MARYLAND v. BriscoeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. KempCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985

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

3Cited by76 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GuidaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. BleeckerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2010
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. MonfriedCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GoffCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. PowellCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002

71 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