male attorney suspended for six months after he knowingly solicited female client for purpose of engaging in sexual intercourse in exchange for legal services and purchased controlled substance from client
How later courts described this case
- male attorney suspended for six months after he knowingly solicited female client for purpose of engaging in sexual intercourse in exchange for legal services and purchased controlled substance from client
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Wright, J.,
dissenting. I must respectfully dissent. Respondent’s gross violations of DR 1-102(A)(3) and DR 1-102(A)(6) were too serious to merit the sanction invoked by the majority. I would suspend respondent at a minimum for an eighteen-month period, and I would consider a period of probation thereafter.
Resnick, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.