§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Joel R. Brandes, a disbarred attorney, Appellant.

Brief

120 Cited authorities

  1. County of Sacramento v. Lewis

    523 U.S. 833 (1998)   Cited 8,680 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "only a purpose to cause harm unrelated to the legitimate object of arrest will satisfy the element of arbitrary conduct shocking to the conscience, necessary for a due process violation"

  2. Village of Willowbrook v. Olech

    528 U.S. 562 (2000)   Cited 6,350 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a class of one could challenge different treatment under the Equal Protection Clause where treatment was alleged to be "irrational and wholly arbitrary"

  3. Daniels v. Williams

    474 U.S. 327 (1986)   Cited 12,708 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the Due Process Clause [of the Fourteenth Amendment] is simply not implicated by a negligent act of an official causing unintended loss of or injury to life, liberty, or property"

  4. Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.

    473 U.S. 432 (1985)   Cited 9,680 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that mental disability is not a quasi-suspect class

  5. Board of Regents v. Roth

    408 U.S. 564 (1972)   Cited 14,653 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that where a public employee's appointment terminated on a particular date and there was no provision for renewal after that date, the employee "did not have a property interest sufficient to require . . . a hearing when [the officials] declined to renew his contract of employment."

  6. Goldfarb v. Virginia State Bar

    421 U.S. 773 (1975)   Cited 800 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a minimum fee schedule enforced by the Virginia state bar did not fall within the Parker exception because the fee schedule was not mandated by the Virginia Supreme Court and thus it could not "fairly be said that the State of Virginia through its Supreme Court Rules required the anticompetitive activities"

  7. Harlen Associates v. Inc. Village of Mineola

    273 F.3d 494 (2d Cir. 2001)   Cited 1,051 times
    Holding that differential treatment based on the “ ‘intent to inhibit or punish the exercise of constitutional rights' ” was basis for selective enforcement claim

  8. Giordano v. City of New York

    274 F.3d 740 (2d Cir. 2001)   Cited 864 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants on the plaintiffs class-of-one equal protection claim because there was no evidence in the record that the defendants knew that they were treating the plaintiff differently from anyone else

  9. Ruston v. Town Bd. for Town Skaneateles

    610 F.3d 55 (2d Cir. 2010)   Cited 625 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding “that the pleading standard set out in Iqbal supersedes the ‘general allegation' deemed sufficient in DeMuria”

  10. Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners

    353 U.S. 232 (1957)   Cited 974 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a state cannot exclude a person from the practice of law based on failure to satisfy its standards of qualification "when there is no basis for their finding that he fails to meet these standards"

  11. Section 691.10 - Conduct of disbarred, suspended or resigned attorneys; abandonment of practice by attorney

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 691.10   Cited 2,210 times

    (a) Compliance with Judiciary Law. Disbarred, suspended or resigned attorneys-at-law shall comply fully and completely with the letter and spirit of sections 478, 479, 484 and 486 of the Judiciary Law relating to practicing as attorneys-at-law without being admitted and registered, and soliciting of business on behalf of an attorney-at-law and the practice of law by an attorney who has been disbarred, suspended or convicted of a felony. (b) Compensation. A disbarred, suspended or resigned attorney

  12. Section 806.9 - Applications for interim suspension while investigation or proceeding is pending

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 806.9   Cited 588 times

    (a) The committee's application for a respondent's interim suspension pursuant to Uniform Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters (section 1240.9 of this Title) shall be brought on before the court by order to show cause executed by the presiding justice and shall be served upon the respondent at a time and in a manner specified therein consistent with Judiciary Law section 90(6). (b) Such order to show cause shall be accompanied by an affirmation or affidavit, and such additional exhibits as are

  13. Section 691.11 - Reinstatement following suspension, disbarment, striking of name from roll of attorneys, or non-disciplinary resignation

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 691.11   Cited 571 times

    (a) In addition to the requirements of section 1240.16 of this Title, an applicant for reinstatement after disbarment or after suspension for a period of more than six months mush establish that during the period of disbarment or suspension and within the two years preceding reinstatement, he or she has successfully completed one credit hour of continuing education accredited in accordance with Part 1500 of this Title for each month of disbarment or suspension up to a maximum of 24 credits. Compliance

  14. Section 603.13 - Repealed

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 603.13   Cited 94 times

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. Tit. 22 § 603.13