Joel I. Keiler

9 Cited authorities

Paramount Communications v. QVC Network
637 A.2d 34 (Del. 1994) Cited 317 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that directors breached their fiduciary duties to a corporation when negotiating a merger by failing to adequately consider a competing offer
Eash v. Riggins Trucking Inc.
757 F.2d 557 (3d Cir. 1985) Cited 256 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that notice and a hearing are required when a sanction is to be imposed pursuant to a court's inherent authority
Goldsmith v. Bd. of Tax Appeals
270 U.S. 117 (1926) Cited 180 times
Holding that an agency, which has the authority to set general rules governing hearings before it, has the power to create and enforce rules limiting who can practice and appear before the agency
Johnson v. Trueblood
629 F.2d 302 (3d Cir. 1980) Cited 48 times
Holding that only "some type of notice and an opportunity to respond" are required when a district court seeks to revoke an attorney's pro hac vice admission because of professional-responsibility violations
U.S. v. DeGeratto
876 F.2d 576 (7th Cir. 1989) Cited 23 times
Holding repeated questioning and dosing argument comments on a variety of uncharged misconduct, including "loan sharking," was clearly prejudicial and "too far afield," thus warranting a new trial
Matter of Keiler
380 A.2d 119 (D.C. 1977) Cited 27 times
Concerning actions of counsel which impede the administration of justice
In re Ming
469 F.2d 1352 (7th Cir. 1972) Cited 21 times
Holding that failure to afford hearing prior to issuing order of suspension based on misdemeanor conviction violated due process
Hedison Mfg. Co. v. N.L.R.B
643 F.2d 32 (1st Cir. 1981) Cited 8 times
No. 80-1421. Argued February 11, 1981. Decided March 11, 1981. David F. Sweeney, Warwick, R. I., with whom Breslin Sweeney, Warwick, R. I., was on brief, for petitioner. Corinna L. Metcalf, Atty., Washington, D.C., with whom William A. Lubbers, Gen. Counsel, John E. Higgins, Jr., Deputy Gen. Counsel, Robert E. Allen, Acting Associate Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, Richard B. Bader and Sandra Shands Elligers, Attys., Washington, D.C., were on brief, for respondent. Petition
Johnson v. Trueblood
476 F. Supp. 90 (E.D. Pa. 1979) Cited 7 times
In Johnson v. Trueblood, 476 F. Supp. 90 (E.D. Pa. 1979), permission to appear pro hac vice was revoked because of the attorney's disruptive conduct during the trial.

Joel I. Keiler

9 Cited authorities

Holding that directors breached their fiduciary duties to a corporation when negotiating a merger by failing to adequately consider a competing offer

Holding that notice and a hearing are required when a sanction is to be imposed pursuant to a court's inherent authority

Holding that an agency, which has the authority to set general rules governing hearings before it, has the power to create and enforce rules limiting who can practice and appear before the agency

Holding that only "some type of notice and an opportunity to respond" are required when a district court seeks to revoke an attorney's pro hac vice admission because of professional-responsibility violations

Holding repeated questioning and dosing argument comments on a variety of uncharged misconduct, including "loan sharking," was clearly prejudicial and "too far afield," thus warranting a new trial

Concerning actions of counsel which impede the administration of justice

Holding that failure to afford hearing prior to issuing order of suspension based on misdemeanor conviction violated due process

In Johnson v. Trueblood, 476 F. Supp. 90 (E.D. Pa. 1979), permission to appear pro hac vice was revoked because of the attorney's disruptive conduct during the trial.