Matter of Shearin

How courts have described this case

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

• finding Rule 3.5(c) violation where the attorney suggested in appellate reply brief that there were rumors the Vice Chancellor had been bribed by the opposing party
• Shearin violated Rule 3.5(c) for filing a reply brief which contained personal attacks against the trial judge and allegations that he was bribed by the opposing party to the litigation.
• Shearin violated Rule 3.5(c) for filing a reply brief which contained personal attacks against the trial judge and allegations that he was bribed by the opposing party to the litigation.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).