# In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Holm

> Oregon Supreme Court · February 7, 1979 · 285 Or. 189

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9538502

## Case

- **Full name:** In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of ROGER v. HOLM, Accused
- **Court:** Oregon Supreme Court
- **Decided:** February 7, 1979
- **Citations:** 285 Or. 189; 590 P.2d 233; 1979 Ore. LEXIS 844
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Holman
- **Judges:** Denecke, Holman, Howell, Bryson, Lent, Linde
- **Cited by:** 8 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9538502

## Opinion text

HOLMAN, J.,
concurring.
In the past this court has made an understandable distinction in the way offending members of the Bar have been treated between those guilty of dishonesty and those guilty of procrastination and inattention to their clients’ affairs. It has been reluctant to inflict severe sanctions for other than dishonesty.
Because of the number of cases presently coming to this court which concern legitimate complaints of procrastination and inattention, I have come to the conclusion that protection of the public requires that more severe sanctions be imposed for such offenses. Unfortunately, the effect upon the client may be just as disastrous as if dishonesty were involved.
In the present instance the accused did not even respond to the Bar’s inquiry when he was originally informed of the complaint made against him. I would suspend him for a year to get his attention.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9538502. Public record. Not legal advice.