conduct involving misrepresentations about knowledge of the law and failure to research law of California
How later courts described this case
- conduct involving misrepresentations about knowledge of the law and failure to research law of California
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ELDRIDGE, Judge,
dissenting:
The trial court in this case found that Bar Counsel had not shown “that there had been any previous complaints or grievances filed against the Defendant.” The court also pointed out that the “demeanor of the Defendant before the Court was that of a remorseful person.” The trial court went on to find that Mr. McCloskey “was completely candid in testifying before the Court” and cooperated with Bar Counsel. Most significantly, the trial court found
“that Mr. McCloskey has put himself in the predicament that he now finds himself because of poor judgment *691 rather than any willful intent to violate the Canons of Professional Responsibility.”
Bar counsel has taken no exception to these findings.
In light of the trial court’s findings in this case, I would impose a substantial suspension instead of disbarment.