In Re Slattery

How courts have described this case

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

• determining that Bar Counsel’s Specification of Charges listing “theft” as an alleged violation fairly put Slattery on notice that “theft by conversion and misappropriation” was the alleged misconduct
• noting court could find no case in which effective assistance of counsel was held to be due process requirement in bar disciplinary proceedings such that counsel’s deficient performance, if sufficiently prejudicial, could require new proceeding
• \The burden of proving the charges rests with Bar Counsel and factual findings must be supported by clear and convincing evidence.\
• “There is no requirement . . . that an attorney actually have been convicted of a crime for the rule to apply.”
• disbarment for theft and dishonest deposition testimony in connection with related lawsuit
• “In construing the phrase ‘criminal act’ for purposes of Rule 8.4(b), this court may properly look to the law of any jurisdiction that could have prosecuted the respondent for the misconduct,” and conviction is not necessary to pursue disciplinary charges.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).