7 North Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 2003–2016 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Dakota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Mulhallgreen2 sentences2016Clearly; the Bar must be vigilant in guarding ’the rights of clients, “but care should be taken to avoid the use of disciplinary action ... as a substitute for what *232 is essentially a malpractice action.” See In re Myers, 164 Ariz. 558 , 561 n. 3, 795 P.2d 201 , 204 n. 3 (1990) (citations and internal quotations omitted); see also In re Mulhall, 159 Ariz. 528, 531 , 768 P.2d 1173, 1176 (1989) (noting that negligently allowing a statute of limitations to run does not constitute an ethical violation). 2016Clearly; the Bar must be vigilant in guarding ’the rights of clients, “but care should be taken to avoid the use of disciplinary action ... as a substitute for what *232 is essentially a malpractice action.” See In re Myers, 164 Ariz. 558 , 561 n. 3, 795 P.2d 201 , 204 n. 3 (1990) (citations and internal quotations omitted); see also In re Mulhall, 159 Ariz. 528, 531 , 768 P.2d 1173, 1176 (1989) (noting that negligently allowing a statute of limitations to run does not constitute an ethical violation). | 5 | 5 |
Committee on Legal Ethics of the West Virginia State Bar v. Comettigreen2 sentences2005See also The Florida Bar v. Neale, 384 So.2d 1264, 1265 (Fla.1980) (stating the “rights of clients should be zealously guarded by the bar, but care should be taken to avoid the use of disciplinary action ... as a substitute for what is essentially a malpractice action”); In re Complaint as to Conduct of Gygi, 273 Or. 443 , 541 P.2d 1392, 1396 (1975) (stating “we are not prepared to hold that isolated instances of ordinary negligence are alone sufficient to warrant disciplinary action”); Committee on Legal Ethics v. Mullins, 159 W.Va. 647 , 226 S.E.2d 427 , 430 (1976) (stating “[c]harges of iso 2005See also The Florida Bar v. Neale, 384 So.2d 1264, 1265 (Fla.1980) (stating the “rights of clients should be zealously guarded by the bar, but care should be taken to avoid the use of disciplinary action ... as a substitute for what is essentially a malpractice action”); In re Complaint as to Conduct of Gygi, 273 Or. 443 , 541 P.2d 1392, 1396 (1975) (stating “we are not prepared to hold that isolated instances of ordinary negligence are alone sufficient to warrant disciplinary action”); Committee on Legal Ethics v. Mullins, 159 W.Va. 647 , 226 S.E.2d 427 , 430 (1976) (stating “[c]harges of iso | 4 | 4 |
In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Gygigreen2 sentences2005See also The Florida Bar v. Neale, 384 So.2d 1264, 1265 (Fla.1980) (stating the “rights of clients should be zealously guarded by the bar, but care should be taken to avoid the use of disciplinary action ... as a substitute for what is essentially a malpractice action”); In re Complaint as to Conduct of Gygi, 273 Or. 443 , 541 P.2d 1392, 1396 (1975) (stating “we are not prepared to hold that isolated instances of ordinary negligence are alone sufficient to warrant disciplinary action”); Committee on Legal Ethics v. Mullins, 159 W.Va. 647 , 226 S.E.2d 427 , 430 (1976) (stating “[c]harges of iso 2005See also The Florida Bar v. Neale, 384 So.2d 1264, 1265 (Fla.1980) (stating the “rights of clients should be zealously guarded by the bar, but care should be taken to avoid the use of disciplinary action ... as a substitute for what is essentially a malpractice action”); In re Complaint as to Conduct of Gygi, 273 Or. 443 , 541 P.2d 1392, 1396 (1975) (stating “we are not prepared to hold that isolated instances of ordinary negligence are alone sufficient to warrant disciplinary action”); Committee on Legal Ethics v. Mullins, 159 W.Va. 647 , 226 S.E.2d 427 , 430 (1976) (stating “[c]harges of iso | 4 | 4 |
The Florida Bar v. Nealegreen2 sentences2005See also The Florida Bar v. Neale, 384 So.2d 1264, 1265 (Fla.1980) (stating the "rights of clients should be zealously guarded by the bar, but care should be taken to avoid the use of disciplinary action . . . as a substitute for what is essentially a malpractice action"); In re Complaint as to Conduct of Gygi, 273 Or. 443 , 541 P.2d 1392, 1396 (1975) (stating "we are not prepared to hold that isolated instances of ordinary negligence are alone sufficient to warrant disciplinary action"); Committee on Legal Ethics v. Mullins, 159 W.Va. 647 , 226 S.E.2d 427 , 430 (1976) (stating "[c]harges of i 2005See also The Florida Bar v. Neale, 384 So.2d 1264, 1265 (Fla.1980) (stating the “rights of clients should be zealously guarded by the bar, but care should be taken to avoid the use of disciplinary action ... as a substitute for what is essentially a malpractice action”); In re Complaint as to Conduct of Gygi, 273 Or. 443 , 541 P.2d 1392, 1396 (1975) (stating “we are not prepared to hold that isolated instances of ordinary negligence are alone sufficient to warrant disciplinary action”); Committee on Legal Ethics v. Mullins, 159 W.Va. 647 , 226 S.E.2d 427 , 430 (1976) (stating “[c]harges of iso | 4 | 4 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Dakota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Myers
green
2 sentences2016Clearly; the Bar must be vigilant in guarding ’the rights of clients, “but care should be taken to avoid the use of disciplinary action ... as a substitute for what *232 is essentially a malpractice action.” See In re Myers, 164 Ariz. 558 , 561 n. 3, 795 P.2d 201 , 204 n. 3 (1990) (citations and internal quotations omitted); see also In re Mulhall, 159 Ariz. 528, 531 , 768 P.2d 1173, 1176 (1989) (noting that negligently allowing a statute of limitations to run does not constitute an ethical violation). 2016Clearly; the Bar must be vigilant in guarding ’the rights of clients, “but care should be taken to avoid the use of disciplinary action ... as a substitute for what *232 is essentially a malpractice action.” See In re Myers, 164 Ariz. 558 , 561 n. 3, 795 P.2d 201 , 204 n. 3 (1990) (citations and internal quotations omitted); see also In re Mulhall, 159 Ariz. 528, 531 , 768 P.2d 1173, 1176 (1989) (noting that negligently allowing a statute of limitations to run does not constitute an ethical violation). | 5 | 2003–2016 |
COMMITTEE ON LEGAL ETHICS, ETC. v. Mullins
green
2 sentences2005See also The Florida Bar v. Neale, 384 So.2d 1264, 1265 (Fla.1980) (stating the "rights of clients should be zealously guarded by the bar, but care should be taken to avoid the use of disciplinary action . . . as a substitute for what is essentially a malpractice action"); In re Complaint as to Conduct of Gygi, 273 Or. 443 , 541 P.2d 1392, 1396 (1975) (stating "we are not prepared to hold that isolated instances of ordinary negligence are alone sufficient to warrant disciplinary action"); Committee on Legal Ethics v. Mullins, 159 W.Va. 647 , 226 S.E.2d 427 , 430 (1976) (stating "[c]harges of i 2005See also The Florida Bar v. Neale, 384 So.2d 1264, 1265 (Fla.1980) (stating the “rights of clients should be zealously guarded by the bar, but care should be taken to avoid the use of disciplinary action ... as a substitute for what is essentially a malpractice action”); In re Complaint as to Conduct of Gygi, 273 Or. 443 , 541 P.2d 1392, 1396 (1975) (stating “we are not prepared to hold that isolated instances of ordinary negligence are alone sufficient to warrant disciplinary action”); Committee on Legal Ethics v. Mullins, 159 W.Va. 647 , 226 S.E.2d 427 , 430 (1976) (stating “[c]harges of iso | 4 | 2003–2005 |
Committee on Legal Ethics of West Virginia State Bar v. Mullins
green
2 sentences2005See also The Florida Bar v. Neale, 384 So.2d 1264, 1265 (Fla.1980) (stating the "rights of clients should be zealously guarded by the bar, but care should be taken to avoid the use of disciplinary action . . . as a substitute for what is essentially a malpractice action"); In re Complaint as to Conduct of Gygi, 273 Or. 443 , 541 P.2d 1392, 1396 (1975) (stating "we are not prepared to hold that isolated instances of ordinary negligence are alone sufficient to warrant disciplinary action"); Committee on Legal Ethics v. Mullins, 159 W.Va. 647 , 226 S.E.2d 427 , 430 (1976) (stating "[c]harges of i 2005See also The Florida Bar v. Neale, 384 So.2d 1264, 1265 (Fla.1980) (stating the “rights of clients should be zealously guarded by the bar, but care should be taken to avoid the use of disciplinary action ... as a substitute for what is essentially a malpractice action”); In re Complaint as to Conduct of Gygi, 273 Or. 443 , 541 P.2d 1392, 1396 (1975) (stating “we are not prepared to hold that isolated instances of ordinary negligence are alone sufficient to warrant disciplinary action”); Committee on Legal Ethics v. Mullins, 159 W.Va. 647 , 226 S.E.2d 427 , 430 (1976) (stating “[c]harges of iso | 4 | 2003–2005 |
Weber v. Weber
green
2 sentences2009We held that the flaws and weaknesses in the psychologist's report and testimony were apparent to the district court and that the "frailty" of a doctor's opinion "goes to the weight to be accorded the opinion, and not its admissibility." Id. at 728 . [¶ 12] As in Weber , the ethical violation Dr. Coombs may have committed did not render his report and testimony inadmissible. 2009We held that the flaws and weaknesses in the psychologist’s report and testimony were apparent to the district court and that the “frailty” of a doctor’s opinion “goes to the weight to be accorded the opinion, and not its admissibility.” Id. at 728 . [¶ 12] As in Weber, the ethical violation Dr. Coombs may have committed did not render his report and testimony inadmissible. | 2 | 2009–2009 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.