Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- St. Mary’s Law Journal (4)
- St. Mary’s University School of Law (4)
- Inc. (2)
- Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct (2)
- 1.07(e) (1)
-
- 1.08(i) (1)
- 11 U.S.C. § 105 (1)
- 11 U.S.C. § 328 (1)
- 28 U.S.C. § 1927 (1)
- ABA’s Commission on Multidisciplinary Practice (1)
- AICPA (1)
- Abuse of discretion (1)
- Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (1)
- Advocate (1)
- American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (1)
- Anders brief (1)
- Article 4590i (1)
- Assistant U.S. Trustees (1)
- Attorney client privilege (1)
- Bankruptcy appellate panel (BAP) (1)
- Bankruptcy law (1)
- Batson v. Kentucky (1)
- Batson/Edmondson challenge (1)
- Chapter 11 bankruptcy (1)
- Chapter 12 bankruptcy (1)
- Chapter 7 bankruptcy (1)
- Client-lawyer relationship (1)
- Code of Judicial Conduct (1)
- Confidentiality (1)
- Conflicts of interest (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Immigration Law
If One Is Good, Two Must Be Better: A Comparison Of The Texas Standards For Appellate Conduct And The Texas Disciplinary Rules Of Professional Conduct., Edward L. Wilkinson
If One Is Good, Two Must Be Better: A Comparison Of The Texas Standards For Appellate Conduct And The Texas Disciplinary Rules Of Professional Conduct., Edward L. Wilkinson
St. Mary's Law Journal
The Supreme Court of Texas and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals adopted the Standards for Appellate Conduct (Standards) on February 1, 1999. The Standards are intended to “give practitioners a valuable tool to use with clients who demand unprofessional conduct” by imposing “an affirmative duty to educate the client about the Standards of Appellate Conduct.” The Standards further state they do not “alter existing standards of conduct under the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Procedure, or the Code of Judicial Conduct.” Under the Rules of Disciplinary Procedure, sanctionable conduct includes “acts or omissions…which violate one or more of the Texas …
Through Gritted Teeth And Clenched Jaw: Court-Initiated Sanctions Opinions In Bankruptcy Courts., Nancy B. Rapoport
Through Gritted Teeth And Clenched Jaw: Court-Initiated Sanctions Opinions In Bankruptcy Courts., Nancy B. Rapoport
St. Mary's Law Journal
Bankruptcy courts see too many incompetent bankruptcy lawyers, and the courts have few options for dealing with them. A court can rule against the lawyer, but this strategy punishes the lawyer’s client, who may be an innocent bystander. Alternatively, nothing prohibits a judge from deciding to hand down a sanctions opinion. Sanctions opinions arise when one party makes a request, or the court believes a lawyer’s behavior is serious enough to merit a written order. These instances include flouting the law—either bankruptcy law or the ethical rules—or being unaware of the fundamentals of bankruptcy practice and policy. In the instance …
Hall's Standards Of Review In Texas Foreword., Wallace B. Jefferson
Hall's Standards Of Review In Texas Foreword., Wallace B. Jefferson
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract Forthcoming.
Hall's Standards Of Review In Texas., W. Wendell Hall, O. Rey Rodriguez, Rosemarie Kanusky, Mark Emery
Hall's Standards Of Review In Texas., W. Wendell Hall, O. Rey Rodriguez, Rosemarie Kanusky, Mark Emery
St. Mary's Law Journal
Standards of review distribute power within the judicial branch by defining the relationship between trial and appellate courts. These standards “frame the issues, define the depth of review, assign power among judicial actors, and declare the proper materials to review.” Standards of review are the cornerstones of appeals. These standards must be woven into the discussion of the facts and substantive law in a manner which persuades the appellate court that the trial court erred. Litigants must measure their factual and legal arguments against the appropriate rubric to write an effective and persuasive brief. Appellate judges agree that mechanical recitation …
Ethical Issues Associated With Multidisciplinary Practices In Texas., Michael Kelly
Ethical Issues Associated With Multidisciplinary Practices In Texas., Michael Kelly
St. Mary's Law Journal
In 2000, the American Bar Association House of Delegates voted to uphold the ban on multidisciplinary practices (MDPs) set out in Rule 5.4 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct (Model Rules). In 2009, the ABA announced the creation of the Ethics 20/20 Commission to review the Model Rules in the context of globalization. The Commission announced it was looking into alternative business structures, including MDPs. In an MDP a client can seek the advice of several professionals with experience in different disciplines working in a single business. Under Rule 5.4, a lawyer is prohibited from sharing legal fees with …