District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 7/17/1997
In Re Haar
Citations
- 698 A.2d 412
- 1997 D.C. App. LEXIS 179
- 1997 WL 414656
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that the attorney “did not nevertheless misappropriated the difference between 67% and the amount that would have resulted from that fee arrangement. 18 attempt to conceal his conduct from his client” and “informed her of what he proposed to do before withdrawing the” money
- “To the extent the withdrawal [from a joint lawyer-client account] ‘is disputed by the client,’ there is, necessarily, a [Rule 1.15(c) ] misappropriation.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Ferren, Steadman, Ruiz
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
19 cases in this archive cite this case.
- In Re BerrymanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2000-12-28· cited 51×
- In Re SmithDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2003-02-27· cited 40×
- In Re the Discipline of DorothySouth Dakota Supreme Court· 2000-02-09· cited 38×
- Attorney Grievance Commission v. CulverCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 2002-10-10· cited 37×
- In Re HagerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2002-12-19· cited 33×
- In Re ManceDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2009-10-29· cited 32×
- In Re TraversDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2000-12-28· cited 22×
- In Re MitchellDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1999-03-18· cited 20×
- In Re SheridanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2002-04-18· cited 14×
- In Re MidlenDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2005-11-10· cited 8×
- Matter of HaarAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 2023-01-26· cited 3×
- In re SmithDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2013-07-25· cited 1×
- In re Abigail AskewDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2020-02-20
- In re Harris LindseyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2020-12-10
- In re ThaxtonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2009-09-10
- In re Paul S. HaarDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2022-02-24
- In re John F. Kennedy and Kathleen A. DolanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2022-08-25
- In re Kennedy and DolanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2022-09-01
- In re KrameDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2022-11-03
Cites
33 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Matter of AddamsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1990-08-06· cited 255×
- In Re RebackDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1986-07-31· cited 161×
- In Re HutchinsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1987-12-04· cited 140×
- In Re GoffeDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1994-05-05· cited 107×
- In Re MicheelDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1992-05-19· cited 106×
- Sinai v. Polinger Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1985-08-30· cited 89×
- Matter of SmithDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1979-06-13· cited 84×
- In Re HarrisonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1983-05-26· cited 82×
- In Re PiersonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1997-02-28· cited 63×
- In Re HesslerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1988-10-27· cited 61×
- In Re RyanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1996-01-29· cited 58×
- In Re HinesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1984-09-26· cited 58×
- In Re HopkinsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1996-05-31· cited 40×
- Matter of ThorupDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1981-07-07· cited 36×
- In Re RayDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1996-05-09· cited 36×
- In Re PelsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1995-01-30· cited 35×
- In Re EvansDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1990-07-24· cited 32×
- In Re ChoroszejDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1992-12-30· cited 31×
- In Re ChisholmDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1996-07-03· cited 26×
- Continental Casualty Co. v. KellyD.C. Circuit· 1939-06-30· cited 25×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.