Legal Opinion
In re Strouse, Esq.
Supreme Court of Vermont
Decided July 15, 2011No. 2010-053PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Per curiam
¶ 1. In this case, we review, on our own motion, a decision of a Hearing Panel of the Professional Responsibility Board, which concluded that respondent, Margaret Strouse, engaged in deceit, violating Rule 8.4(c) of the Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct. The Panel imposed a sanction suspending respondent from the practice of law for six months. By our order, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel has been designated appellant. Disciplinary counsel argues that we should uphold the finding of a violation of the disciplinary rule, but that the sanction is too lenient, and respondent should be…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Silva v. StevensSupreme Court of Vermont · 1991
- Crompton v. BeedleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1910
- In the Matter of GrimesMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
- White v. PepinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1989
- Sugarline Associates v. Alpen AssociatesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1990
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- In re Glenn Robinson, Esq. (Office of Disciplinary Counsel)Supreme Court of Vermont · 2019
- In re Richard Bowen, Esq.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2021
- In re Phyllis McCoy Jacien, Esq.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2018
- In re Stacey Adamski, Esq. (Office of Disciplinary Counsel)Supreme Court of Vermont · 2020
- In re Stacey Adamski, Esq. (Office of Disciplinary Counsel)Supreme Court of Vermont · 2020
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.