In re Brown

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding disbarment was warranted where attorney committed numerous acts of misconduct prior to and after being admitted to the South Carolina Bar, including a joint real estate venture with a client that involved defrauding lenders
• “The central purpose of the disciplinary process is to protect the public from unscrupulous and indifferent lawyers.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In Re Prendergast
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 2010-11-08· cited 7×
• In the Matter of Timothy Moses
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 2016-04-20· cited 1×
• In the Matter of Frank Barnwell McMaster
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 2017-01-11· cited 1×
• State v. Mazique
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2016-10-19· cited 1×
• In re Cromartie
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 2012-12-28

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• In re Wong
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 2000-06-29· cited 550×
• In Re Hall
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1998-11-30· cited 25×
• Stratmore v. State Bar
  California Supreme Court· 1975-08-04· cited 24×
• Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Zdrok
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1994-08-01· cited 24×
• Kentucky Bar Ass'n v. Signer
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 1976-02-20· cited 16×
• Matter of Brooks
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1996-10-14· cited 6×
• Matter of Edwards
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1997-08-04· cited 2×