Legal Opinion
In Re Members of the State Bar of Arizona, Bates
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided July 26, 1976No. SB-96PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CAMERON, Chief Justice.
This matter is before the court on objections to the conclusions of law and recommendations of the Board of Governors of the State Bar of Arizona which held that the respondents John R. Bates and Van O’Steen, attorneys at law, were guilty of violating the disciplinary rules for attorneys as provided in Rule 29(a) of the Rules of the Supreme Court, 17 A.R.S.
We must answer the following questions on review:
1. Does DR 2-101 (B) violate either the federal or state antitrust laws ?
2. Does DR 2-101 (B) violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Tumey v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Parker v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Gibson v. BerryhillSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Bates v. State Bar of ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Bates v. State Bar of ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Attorney General of Maryland v. WaldronCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1981
- Jacoby v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- Marc Feldman v. William C. Gardner Edward J. Hickey, Jr. v. District of Columbia Court of AppealsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1981
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.