Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Hodes

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided December 23, 2014No. 61ag/13PublishedCited by 56 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBattaglia, J.

Michael C. Hodes, Respondent, was admitted to the Bar of this Court on December 18, 1975. On October 29, 2013, the Attorney Grievance Commission, (“Petitioner” or “Bar Counsel”), acting pursuant to Maryland Rule lO-NSRa), 1 filed a “Petition For Disciplinary or Remedial Action” against Respondent related to his representation of Gloria S. Ominsky. Petitioner alleged that Respondent violated the following Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct (“Rule”): 1.7 (Conflict of Interest: General Rule), 2 Rule 1.15(d) (Safekeeping Property), 3 8.1(a) (Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters), 4 8.4(a),…

2Cases cited60 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. VanderlindeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
  2. Maryland State Bar Ass'n v. AgnewCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1974
  3. Berkey v. DeliaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1980
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SheridanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. MooneyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000

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

3Cited by56 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. FrammCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2016
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. MixterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2015
  3. Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. EdwardsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2019
  4. Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. LangCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2018
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. BartonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2015

51 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