Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Prichard

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided April 11, 2005No. Misc. Docket AG No. 50, September Term, 2003PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBell, C.J.

The Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland (the “Commission”), through Bar Counsel and pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-751, 1 filed against James L. Prichard, the respondent, a Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action, in which it was alleged that he violated Rules 1.15 (Safekeeping Property); 2 8.1 (Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters) 3 and 8.4 (Misconduct), 4 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, Appendix: Rules of Professional Conduct of the Maryland Rules, Maryland Rule 16-812, Maryland Rules 16-603 (Duty to Maintain Account) 5 ; 16-604 (Trust Account — Required De posit) 6 and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SperyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. PostCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. DaskalopoulosCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. WatsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. PrichardCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. Cherry-MahoiCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. HodesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2014
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. NussbaumCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. WhiteheadCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GisrielCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2009

6 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