Legal Opinion
In re Goldberg
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided December 24, 1998No. 98-BG-549PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Per curiam
Respondent James M. Goldberg, who had a management position in his law firm, commingled certain law firm operating funds with funds in the firm’s escrow accounts for a brief period in October 1995. By such commingling, Goldberg violated “[o]ne of the most basic rules of fiduciary conduct,” embodied in D.C. Rule of Professional Conduct 1.15(a) (clients’ property must be held separately from lawyer’s own property). See In re Hessler, 549 A.2d 700, 700 (D.C.1988). Goldberg subsequently enrolled himself voluntarily in a D.C. Bar class on Ethics and Lawyers Trust Accounting. Cf. In re Mill-stein,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- In Re DelaneyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
- In Re HesslerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- In Re MillsteinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995
- In Re JeffriesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- In Re TeitelbaumDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- In Re ManceDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
- In Re RivlinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004