Legal Opinion

State Bar Grievance Administrator v. Estes

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 18, 1973No. 7 September Term 1973, Docket No. 54,463PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, J.

This case comes to us on appeal from the State Bar Grievance Board (hereafter "Board”). Appellant áttorney, Walter O. Estes, contends both that the facts elicited in hearing panel testimony are insufficient to support a finding of unprofessional conduct, and that, in any case, such conduct as the Board found appellant engaged in does not present grounds warranting disciplinary suspension from the practice of law. Thus the facts in this case are of essential importance.

I—FACTS

Appellant represented a client, Earl Harmon, who was involved in a rear-end accident in East Lansing on September 7,…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Kukla v. PerryMichigan Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Attorney General v. NelsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
  3. State Bar of Michigan v. DaggsMichigan Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Henderson v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1965
  5. Eaton v. KnowlesMichigan Supreme Court · 1886

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Geoffrey N. Fieger v. Philip J. Thomas, Grievance Administrator, and Michigan Attorney Grievance CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
  2. Grievance Administrator v. FiegerMichigan Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Payne v. MuskegonMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Acheson v. WhiteSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
  5. In the Matter of GrimesMichigan Supreme Court · 1982

31 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