Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Khandpur

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided July 18, 2011No. Misc. Docket No. AG 3, September Term, 2010PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGreene, J.

Pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-715, the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland (“Petitioner”), acting through Bar Counsel, filed a Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action against Jagjot S. Khandpur (“Respondent”), charging him with professional misconduct arising out of his representation of Bhuwani S. Subedi in his application for asylum. Petitioner charged Respondent with violating Rules 1.3 (Diligence),1 1.4 (Communication),2 1.15 (Safekeeping Property),3 3.4(c) (Fair*4ness to Opposing Party and Counsel),4 8.1 (Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters),5 and 8.4(c) and (d) (Misconduct)6…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SheridanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GuidaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  3. State v. StanleyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1998
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GarfieldCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. FezellCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000

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

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2015
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. Van NelsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2012
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. Heung Sik ParkCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2012
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. TankoCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2012
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. ChapmanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2013

23 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