Legal Opinion

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Jarosinski

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided November 16, 2009No. Misc. Docket AG No. 32, September Term, 2008PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarbera, J.

The Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland (“Petitioner”), acting through Bar Counsel and pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-751(a), 1 filed a Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action (“Petition”) against George S. Jarosinski, Respondent. Bar Counsel charged Respondent with violating the following Maryland Lawyers’ Rules of Professional Conduct (“MRPC”), Maryland Rules, and Maryland Statute: MRPC 1.15 (Safekeeping Property), 2 MRPC 8.1 (Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters), 3 MRPC 8.4 (Miscon duct), 4 Maryland Rule 16-606 (Name and Designation of Account), 5 Maryland Rule 16-609…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. VanderlindeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GlennCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1996
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. AwuahCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. ZuckermanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. GarlandCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. BleeckerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2010
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. CoppolaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2011
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. HodesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2014
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. AgbajeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2014
  5. Attorney Grievance Commission v. LaraCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2011

25 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