members bar (Georgia) · Go Syfert
← Georgia issues

members bar in Georgia

5 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1907–1982 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Georgia 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.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Wood v. State ex rel. Boykingreen
gactapp · 1932 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1940–1940
2 sentences

1940It was said in Wood v. State, 45 Ga. App. 783, 789 ( 165 S. E. 908 ): “Georgia is a common-law State, and it was the rule at common law that the courts had the inherent power to admit attorneys to the bar, with the right to disbar them for sufficient cause, and it is generally held that the statutes do not limit the general powers of the court over attorneys, and that attorneys may be removed for other than statutory grounds.” (Citing.) In DeKrasner v. Boykin, 54 Ga. App. 29, 37 ( 186 S. E. 701 ), it was said: “We have already pointed out that the disbarment proceedings as prescribed in Code,

1940It was said in Wood v. State, 45 Ga. App. 783, 789 ( 165 S. E. 908 ): “Georgia is a common-law State, and it was the rule at common law that the courts had the inherent power to admit attorneys to the bar, with the right to disbar them for sufficient cause, and it is generally held that the statutes do not limit the general powers of the court over attorneys, and that attorneys may be removed for other than statutory grounds.” (Citing.) In DeKrasner v. Boykin, 54 Ga. App. 29, 37 ( 186 S. E. 701 ), it was said: “We have already pointed out that the disbarment proceedings as prescribed in Code,

11
DeKrasner v. Boykingreen
gactapp · 1936 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1940–1940
2 sentences

1940It was said in Wood v. State, 45 Ga. App. 783, 789 ( 165 S. E. 908 ): “Georgia is a common-law State, and it was the rule at common law that the courts had the inherent power to admit attorneys to the bar, with the right to disbar them for sufficient cause, and it is generally held that the statutes do not limit the general powers of the court over attorneys, and that attorneys may be removed for other than statutory grounds.” (Citing.) In DeKrasner v. Boykin, 54 Ga. App. 29, 37 ( 186 S. E. 701 ), it was said: “We have already pointed out that the disbarment proceedings as prescribed in Code,

1940It was said in Wood v. State, 45 Ga. App. 783, 789 ( 165 S. E. 908 ): “Georgia is a common-law State, and it was the rule at common law that the courts had the inherent power to admit attorneys to the bar, with the right to disbar them for sufficient cause, and it is generally held that the statutes do not limit the general powers of the court over attorneys, and that attorneys may be removed for other than statutory grounds.” (Citing.) In DeKrasner v. Boykin, 54 Ga. App. 29, 37 ( 186 S. E. 701 ), it was said: “We have already pointed out that the disbarment proceedings as prescribed in Code,

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (7)

CaseCitedYears
In Re Fitzpatrick neutral
ga · 1981
1 sentence

1982See In re Florida Board of Bar Examiners, 183 S2d 688 (Fla. 1966); Code § 2-501. 4 Regarding the importance of full disclosure and complete candor, see In re Beasley, 243 Ga. 134 (4), supra; and In re Fitzpatrick, 247 Ga. 55 , supra. 5 In addition to serving the public, the Fitness Board serves the members of the bar in upholding public confidence in the profession by denying admission to those not demonstrating the requisite moral character and fitness.

11982–1982
In Re Beasley green
ga · 1979
1 sentence

1982See In re Florida Board of Bar Examiners, 183 S2d 688 (Fla. 1966); Code § 2-501. 4 Regarding the importance of full disclosure and complete candor, see In re Beasley, 243 Ga. 134 (4), supra; and In re Fitzpatrick, 247 Ga. 55 , supra. 5 In addition to serving the public, the Fitness Board serves the members of the bar in upholding public confidence in the profession by denying admission to those not demonstrating the requisite moral character and fitness.

11982–1982
Payne v. State green
gactapp · 1936
2 sentences

1945The inherent authority of courts over the members of its bar can not be defeated by the legislative and executive departments.” Payne v. State, 52 Ga. App. 425 (2) ( 183 S. E. 638 ).

1945The inherent authority of courts over the members of its bar can not be defeated by the legislative and executive departments.” Payne v. State, 52 Ga. App. 425 (2) ( 183 S. E. 638 ).

11945–1945
In re the Disbarment of Smith green
kan · 1906
1 sentence

1937It is at least stale.” See also, in this connection, In re Smith, 73 Kan. 743 (snpra); In re Sherin, 27 S. D. 232 ( 130 N. W. 761 , 40 L.

11937–1937
In re the Disbarment of Elliott green
kan · 1906
1 sentence

1937In re Elliott, 73 Kan. 151 , a case much relied on by the defendant it was said: “While there is no statute of limitations which is technically applicable to a disbarment proceeding, yet where the alleged misconduct set forth in a charge is shown to have occurred more than thirteen years before the charge is filed in this court, and it appears that proceedings to investigate the occurrence were instituted soon thereafter and proceeded so far that an accusation was prepared and the accused made known his defense thereto, and that thereupon the district court having jurisdiction, and the members

11937–1937
In re SHERIN green
sd · 1911
1 sentence

1937It is at least stale.” See also, in this connection, In re Smith, 73 Kan. 743 (snpra); In re Sherin, 27 S. D. 232 ( 130 N. W. 761 , 40 L.

11937–1937
Henderson v. State green
ga · 1905
2 sentences

1907The case of Henderson v. State, 123 Ga. 739 ( 51 S. E. 764 ), not only produced a diversity of opinions among the members of this bench, hut it is feared has been somewhat misapprehended by some of the members of the bar.

1907The case of Henderson v. State, 123 Ga. 739 ( 51 S. E. 764 ), not only produced a diversity of opinions among the members of this bench, hut it is feared has been somewhat misapprehended by some of the members of the bar.

11907–1907

Where else courts name it

PA 40 (1836–2023) CT 27 (1983–2022) LA 24 (1924–2015) CA 19 (1907–2021) WA 17 (1914–2018) MO 16 (1870–2013) NJ 15 (1923–2025) MI 13 (1927–2018) IL 12 (1894–2010) FL 12 (1913–2010) DC 11 (1970–2022) NY 10 (1908–2014) AZ 10 (1920–2018) OK 9 (1911–2025) WV 9 (1898–2021) MD 8 (1929–2014) MT 7 (1895–2007) KY 7 (1873–2026) KS 7 (1896–2007) IN 6 (1942–1993) SD 5 (1909–1990) OR 5 (1923–2011) AR 5 (1924–2010) GA 5 (1907–1982) NV 5 (1949–2012) AL 5 (1937–2026) OH 4 (1932–2025) WI 4 (1967–2016) NM 4 (1895–2020) WY 4 (1936–2000) TN 4 (1953–2013) MS 4 (1991–2004) TX 4 (1948–2023) NE 3 (1908–1990) SC 3 (1951–2026) RI 3 (2001–2015) ND 2 (1903–1910) NC 2 (1932–2006) NH 2 (1986–1990) MN 2 (1900–2016) VA 2 (1937–2002)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check