Legal Opinion

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Groom

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 25, 2011No. OSB 08-105; SC S057898PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

In this lawyer discipline case, the Bar charged the accused with violating Rule of Professional Conduct (RPC) 1.4, which requires that a lawyer keep a client reasonably informed and explain a matter to a client to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions. We conclude that the Bar did not prove that charge by clear and convincing evidence, and we hold that the accused is not guilty of that charge and related charges brought by the Bar and decided by the trial panel.

The charges against the accused arose from the accused’s representation of Richard Eugene…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Arizonans for Official English v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  2. Nelson v. Emerald People's Utility DistrictOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Kerr v. BradburyOregon Supreme Court · 2006
  4. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of PaulsonOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  5. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of PaulsonOregon Supreme Court · 2010

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of ObertOregon Supreme Court · 2012
  2. In re GraeffOregon Supreme Court · 2021
  3. Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee v. Candes Vonniest PrewittTennessee Supreme Court · 2022

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API