Legal Opinion

Nosal v. Neal

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided November 21, 1994No. 94-395PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Robert H. Dudley, Justice.

Judith A. Nosal filed an application with this court’s Client Security Fund Committee and asked that she be reimbursed for a loss suffered as the result of a defalcation by her attorney. The Client Security Fund Committee referred the claim to the Committee on Professional Conduct. See Client Sec. Fund Comm. R. 4(F). The Executive Director of the Committee on Professional Conduct responded that the Committee on Professional Conduct could not certify the claim for payment to the Client Security Fund Committee because Ms. Nosal’s attorney, who is now deceased, had not…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sexton v. Supreme Court Committee on Professional ConductSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1988
  2. Walker v. Supreme Court of Arkansas Committee on Professional ConductSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1982
  3. In re Client Security FundSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1973
  4. McCullough v. NealSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1993

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Healthcare Recoveries, Inc. v. Arkansas Client Security FundSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2005
  2. American Abstract and Title Co. v. RiceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2004
  3. American Abstract and Title Co. v. RiceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2004
  4. Christopher Curran v. Arkansas Client Security Fund CommitteeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API