Attorney Grievance Commission v. Dunietz

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that a hearing judge’s findings of fact are prima facie correct and will not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous
• noting that a hearing judge’s findings of fact are prima facie correct and will not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous
• noting that despite neither the respondent nor Bar Counsel taking exceptions to the hearing judge’s factual findings, the Court shall review the factual findings to ensure that they are not clearly erroneous
• noting that despite neither the respondent nor Bar Counsel taking exceptions to the hearing judge's factual findings, the Court shall review the factual findings to ensure that they are not clearly erroneous
• sustaining hearing judge’s conclusion that failure “to file the appropriate documents ... demonstrated] a lack of diligence”
• disbarring an attorney for client neglect where there were no “circumstances to mitigate or extenuate his neglect” and he demonstrated “continuing disregard for the attorney grievance process”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).