Legal Opinion
In Re Fowler
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided June 20, 1994No. 91-BG-1224PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NEWMAN, Senior Judge:
The Board on Professional Responsibility Board (Board or BPR) concluded that Fowler violated DR 7-101(A)(l) (intentionally failing to seek the lawful objectives of a client), and DR 9-103(B)(4) (failing to promptly pay or deliver client’s funds). Briefly stated, the Board found that after being retained (and paid) to file a motion for a new trial in a case involving two felony convictions, Fowler not only intentionally failed to file the appropriate motions, but refused to return the fee upon demand. After a remand from this court, the Board recommends that Fowler be…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Johnson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- Ex Parte WallSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- In Re HesslerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- In Re SchneiderDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1989
- Matter of WilliamsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- In Re SoininenDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004
- In re HowesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2012
- In Re McLainDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- In Re PondsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- In Re StarnesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.