Office of Lawyer Disciplinary Counsel v. Jordan

How courts have described this case

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

• requiring consideration of “‘(1) whether the lawyer has violated a duty owed to a client, to the public, to the legal system, or to the profession; (2) whether the lawyer acted intentionally, knowingly, or negligently; (3
• annulling law license based, in part, on need to punish attorney in such a way as to provide a deterrent to other Bar members and to restore and protect the public confidence in the ethical standards of the legal profession
• “This Court, like most courts, proceeds from the general rule that, absent compelling extenuating circumstances, misappropriation or conversion by a lawyer of funds entrusted to his/her care warrants disbarment.”
• tracking the language of Rule 3.16.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).