Philbrook

Bar Association v. Philbrook

Good Law
1917 Cal. App. LEXIS 488·35 Cal. App. 460·170 P. 440
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 4, 1917Civ. No. 2286.California1,861 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

On September 24, 1917, an accusation in writing was filed in this court, verified by Lloyd S. Ackerman, Esq., acting on behalf of the Bar Association of San Francisco, wherein it was charged that Horace W. Philbrook had violated his duties as an attorney and counselor at law as defined by section 282 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by the making and filing of a certain affidavit in an action then pending in the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, numbered 73,516, and entitled “Florence E. Phil-brook, Administratrix with the Will Annexed of the Estate of Humphrey A. Randall, Deceased, Plaintiff, versus William J. McGee, Defendant, ’ ’ wherein said Philbrook had specifically charged that several of the present judges of the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco and of several other counties of the state, together with certain specified members of the bar and other designated persons, had confederated in a wicked and criminal conspiracy against the plaintiff in said action, with the design and purpose of having rendered a false and corrupt judgment in said action against said plaintiff and in favor of the defendant therein; which said affidavit,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.