# In Re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against McGlothlen

> Washington Supreme Court · May 12, 1983 · 99 Wash. 2d 515

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9794555

## Case

- **Full name:** In the Matter of the Disciplinary Proceeding Against Gary G. McGlothlen, an Attorney at Law
- **Court:** Washington Supreme Court
- **Decided:** May 12, 1983
- **Citations:** 99 Wash. 2d 515; 663 P.2d 1330; 1983 Wash. LEXIS 1538
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Dimmick
- **Judges:** Utter, Dore, Dimmick
- **Cited by:** 77 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/9794555

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that while respondent attorney violated former *69 Code of Professional Responsibility Disciplinary Rule 5-104 (1972) in entering a business transaction with a client without necessary safeguards, professional discipline was not warranted due to the “relatively undefin…
- holding that while respondent attorney violated former Code of Professional Responsibility Disciplinary Rule 5-l 04 ( 1972) in entering a business transaction with a client without necessary safeguards, professional discipline was not warranted due to the "relatively undefined…
- holding that while respondent attorney violated former Code of Professional Responsibility Disciplinary Rule 5-104 (1972

## Opinion text

Dimmick, J.
(dissenting) — I concur in the analysis of the dissent by Dore, J. However, I see no compelling reason to deviate from the recommendation of the Disciplinary Board.
Stafford and Pearson, JJ., concur with Dimmick, J.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9794555. Public record. Not legal advice.