Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Hines

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided October 17, 2001No. 58, Sept. Term, 2000PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BELL, Chief Judge.

The Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland (AGC), the petitioner, acting through Bar Counsel and at the direction of the Review Board, filed, pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-709, 1 a Petition for Disciplinary Action, alleging violations of Rules 1.7 2 and 5.1(c) 3 of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct, Maryland Rule 16-812, by Jeffrey C. Hines, Esquire, the respondent. 4 In accordance with Maryland Rule 16-709(b), 5 this Court referred the matter to Judge Evelyn Omega Cannon of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City to conduct an evidentiary hearing and to make…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Maryland State Bar Ass'n v. AgnewCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1974
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GlennCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1996
  3. Bar Ass'n v. MarshallCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1973
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SheridanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
  5. ATTORNEY GRIEV. COMM'N OF MARYLAND v. PowellCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. MonfriedCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GarfieldCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. McClainCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003

9 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