Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. White

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided June 10, 1999No. AG 81, Sept. Term, 1997, AG 42, Sept. Term, 1998PublishedCited by 46 opinions

Sept. Term, 1998.

1Opinion of the Court

CATHELL, Judge.

Bar Counsel, on behalf of the Attorney Grievance Commission, petitioner, filed two petitions for disciplinary action against respondent, Elvira M. White. In the first petition, Number 81, Bar Counsel represented and charged that respondent had violated Rule 3.4 (Fairness to opposing party and counsel), 1 and Rule 8.4 (Misconduct), 2 of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct (Rule or Rules). In petition Number 42, Bar Counsel represented and charged that respondent had violated Rule 3. 3 (Candor toward the tribunal),3 and Rule 8.4. We referred the charges in both petitions…

2Cases cited32 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. AwuahCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  5. ATTORNEY GRIEV. COM'N OF MARYLAND v. MyersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1994

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

3Cited by46 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SiskindCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. WardCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SweitzerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. BlumCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. NussbaumCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007

41 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