From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gray v. the State Bar

Supreme Court of California
Jul 2, 1934
1 Cal.2d 226 (Cal. 1934)

Opinion

Docket No. S.F. 15063.

July 2, 1934.

PROCEEDING to review a recommendation of the Board of Governors of The State Bar that petitioner be suspended from the practice of law for one year. Proceeding remanded with directions.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Joseph Scott and Jerry Giesler for Petitioner.

Philbrick McCoy for Respondent.


THE COURT.

[1] It appearing that the transaction which formed the basis of the charges preferred against petitioner, and which resulted in a recommendation by the Board of Governors of The State Bar that he be suspended from practice of the law for a period of one year, involved a party or parties who participated therein with petitioner, but who were not proceeded against and whose conduct in the matter has not been inquired into, it is hereby ordered that this entire proceeding be remanded to the Board of Governors with directions to reopen the same, and by proper orders to bring before it for investigation any members of The State Bar who directly participated in the said transaction, or take such further steps as may seem meet and proper.

Shenk, J., Waste, C.J., and Thompson, J., dissented.


Summaries of

Gray v. the State Bar

Supreme Court of California
Jul 2, 1934
1 Cal.2d 226 (Cal. 1934)
Case details for

Gray v. the State Bar

Case Details

Full title:BINGHAM GRAY, Petitioner, v. THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jul 2, 1934

Citations

1 Cal.2d 226 (Cal. 1934)
33 P.2d 1016

Citing Cases

Herrscher v. State Bar

No charges were filed, however, against Ehrlich. If the securing of this contract, under the circumstances…

Gray v. the State Bar

A writ of review was issued, and on the hearing, it appearing that the transaction which formed the basis of…