In re Manlapit

Citations

• 25 Haw. 547
• 1920 Haw. LEXIS 30

Syllabus

<p>Attorney and Client — suspension and disbarment — parties.</p> <p>A proceeding under Act 19 S. L. 1919 to disbar a district court practitioner may be instituted by the attorney general and his complaint may be verified upon information and belief.</p> <p>Same — same—relation of attorney and party aggrieved.</p> <p>The relation of attorney and client need not exist between the attorney and the party aggrieved in order to make the misconduct of the attorney ground for disbarment.</p> <p>Same — same—nature of act charged.</p> <p>The act with which the attorney is charged as ground for disbarment must be of such a nature as to reflect upon his professional character but need not constitute a criminal offense.</p> <p>Same — same—same.</p> <p>Any act which imports fraud or dishonesty on the part of an attorney or any other gross misconduct which would reflect upon his professional character constitutes sufficient grounds for disbarment.</p> <p>Same- — same—sufficiency of complaint.</p> <p>The complaint in this case does not allege facts sufficient to charge the respondent with fraud or, deceit or other gross misconduct • meriting disbarment,</p>