Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Walter

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided March 18, 2009No. Misc. Docket AG No. 10, September Term, 2007PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMurphy, J.

On June 5, 2007, the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland (the Commission) filed a Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action in which it asserted that Harold M. Walter, Respondent, violated Rule 8.4 of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct. 1 The Petition included the following assertions:

1. Respondent was admitted to the Maryland Bar on December 21,1983----

2. During times relevant to this matter, Respondent maintained an office of the practice of law in Baltimore City, Maryland, and was a partner in the law firm of Tydings and Rosenberg, hereafter “the firm.”

% * *

7. From 2003…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. MonfriedCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. ReinhardtCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SiskindCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. UgwuonyeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. AdamsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1998

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. McDonaldCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2014
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. ByrdCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2009
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. StinsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2012
  4. Motor Vehicle Administration v. CarpenterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2012
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. AmbeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2012

4 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