By Michael A. Mora | June 8, 2023
In the 24-page ruling, the Florida Supreme Court held that the attorney "made statements in three separate legal proceedings that impugned the integrity of members of the judiciary," and that the attorney "failed to show that he had an objectively reasonable factual basis for making the statements."
By Cedra Mayfield | June 8, 2023
"The Court does its best to address every matter in a timely fashion, but the two-term rule does not apply to disciplinary matters," said Supreme Court of Justice Public Information Officer Kathleen Joyner.
By Committee on Judicial Ethics | June 7, 2023
A part-time town or village justice may not simultaneously serve as a Deputy Chief of the Veterans Affairs Police Department.
By Committee on Judicial Ethics | June 6, 2023
A part-time attorney judge may not place an advertisement promoting their law practice on a building owned by a local business that frequently appears before the judge.
By Avalon Zoppo | June 5, 2023
Judge's attorney decries lack of due processing, saying 95-year-old jurist was denied notice and an opportunity to be heard.
By Michael A. Mora | June 5, 2023
Now, it will be up to the Florida Supreme Court to either accept or deny the stipulation of public reprimand that the judge has agreed to despite that she has less than a month before her resignation takes effect.
By Marianna Wharry | June 5, 2023
An Ohio attorney's frivolous filings and false statements to a tribunal led to his 18-month suspension by the Ohio Supreme Court, with 12 months stayed.
By Colleen Murphy | June 2, 2023
"Even were we to reach a contrary conclusion as to the defamatory nature of the statements in question, we would conclude the respondent judge erred in denying the motion for summary judgment based on a lack of actual malice," Judge Michael F. Kelly said.
By Jane Wester | June 2, 2023
Senior U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein reported that in 1994 and 1995, when he was a partner at Stroock & Stroock & Lavan, he represented Trump Equitable Fifth Avenue Co. He said he could decide the matter impartially, but gave the parties two weeks to comment.
By Cedra Mayfield | June 1, 2023
"The panel could only find the clear and convincing standard was met because it ignored, did not cite, and refrained from weighing all facts contrary to its initial conclusion," Coomer's defense counsel wrote. "That is inconsistent with due process."
Presented by BigVoodoo
Join the industry's top owners, investors, developers, brokers & financiers at THE MULTIFAMILY EVENT OF THE YEAR!
Law.com celebrates the California law firms and legal departments driving the state's dynamic legal landscape.
The Texas Lawyer honors attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession in Texas.
CORE RESPONSIBILITIES AND TASKS: Reporting to the Senior Vice President, Chief Legal Officer &...
Yale New Haven Health seeks a dynamic and collaborative executive to serve as its Vice President, Labor Strategy and Senior Associate Genera...
Nestled in the heart of Northern California Wine Country, Sonoma County is the largest county in the North Bay region of the San Francisco B...