Marlowe

Marlowe v. State Bar

Good Law
1965 Cal. LEXIS 186·46 Cal. Rptr. 326·63 Cal. 2d 304·405 P.2d 150
Supreme Court of CaliforniaSeptember 8, 1965S. F. No. 22057California2,454 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

This is a proceeding to review the recommendation of the Board of Governors of the State Bar that petitioner be suspended from the practice of law for six months.

A local administrative committee concluded that petitioner violated his oath and duties as an attorney and committed *306 acts involving moral turpitude and dishonesty. It also decided that petitioner wilfully violated rules 4 and 8 of the Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of California. Rule 4 provides that, “A member of the State Bar shall not acquire an interest adverse to a client.” Rule 8 provides that a member, “shall not directly or indirectly purchase property at a . . . judicial sale in . . . [a] proceeding in which such member appears as attorney for a party.” The local committee rendered findings of fact which purported to support these conclusions.

The Board of Governors modified the findings of fact to some extent, but adopted the recommendation of the local committee that petitioner should be suspended from practice for six months. 1

We have concluded that petitioner’s conduct warrants discipline, but that on the record before this court six months’ suspension is excessive and that a three…

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.