Attorney Grievance Commission v. Lane

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that disbarment was the appropriate sanction for an attorney’s “repeated material misrepresentations”
• holding disbarment was an appropriate sanction where attorney “failed to diligently act on his clients’ behalf and he then compounded this failure by engaging in a pattern of deceitful and lying conduct designed to conceal his lack of diligence”
• finding disbarment to be the appropri ate sanction where attorney made “repeated material misrepresentations that constitute a pattern of deceitful conduct, as opposed to an isolated instance” in violation of MRPC 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, and 8.4(a)(c) and (d)
• “We have not, however, always found disbarment to be the appropriate sanction where there is misrepresentation involved, especially where misappropriation of money was not involved.”
• “We have not, however, always found disbarment to be the appropriate sanction where there is misrepresentation involved, especially where misappropriation of money was not involved.”
• failure to act diligently on client’s behalf

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).