# In Re Reback

> District of Columbia Court of Appeals · July 31, 1986 · 513 A.2d 226

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9714671

## Case

- **Full name:** In Re William REBACK and Charles C. Parsons, Members of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals
- **Court:** District of Columbia Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** July 31, 1986
- **Citations:** 513 A.2d 226; 1986 D.C. App. LEXIS 384
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Newman
- **Judges:** Pryor, Ne-Beker, MacK, Newman, Ferren, Belson, Terry, Rogers, Stead-Man
- **Cited by:** 126 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/9714671

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that false signature on complaint “prejudiced the administration of justice itself, even though the[ ] dishonesty, as such, caused the client little, if any, prejudice”

## Opinion text

NEWMAN, Associate Judge,
dissenting:
I join the dissent of Terry, J., and write separately only to reaffirm my continued adherence to the views expressed in that portion of Section II of the division opinion which discussed the appropriate sanction, In re Reback and Parsons, 487 A.2d 235, 242-43 , vacated 492 A.2d 267 (D.C.1985), that portion of Section II having been authored by me. This court does a disservice to the public in imposing such meager discipline on these two lawyers who have demonstrated fundamental flaws in the most vital area of basic honesty.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9714671. Public record. Not legal advice.