Legal Opinion

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Smith

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided October 18, 1983No. SC 29583PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

In this attorney discipline proceeding the accused is charged with violating DR 7-110(B), which prohibits ex parte contact by a lawyer and provides as follows:

“(B) In an adversary proceeding, a lawyer shall not communicate, or cause another to communicate, as to the merits of the cause with a judge or an official before whom the proceeding is pending, except:
“(1) In the course of official proceedings in the cause.
“(2) In writing if he promptly delivers a copy of the writing to opposing counsel or to the adverse party if he is not represented by a lawyer.
“(3) Orally upon adequate notice to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. In Re FriedmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Crow v. AbrahamOregon Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Haney v. Neace-Stark Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1923
  4. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of BurrowsOregon Supreme Court · 1981
  5. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of BellOregon Supreme Court · 1982

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of DuggerOregon Supreme Court · 2002
  2. In re ThompsonOregon Supreme Court · 1997
  3. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of MerkelOregon Supreme Court · 2006
  4. In Re LeuenbergerOregon Supreme Court · 2004
  5. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of GillisOregon Supreme Court · 1984

1 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