State v. Flaniken

2 Citing cases

  1. Warren v. Stanfield (In re Stanfield)

    2012 OK 8 (Okla. 2012)   Cited 31 times

    Berryhill v. Spillers, 1924 OK 1120, 105 Okla. 255, 232 P. 376, 378.See also Kelly v. Kelly, 1928 OK 736, 134 Okla. 172, 272 P. 838, 840 (Court reversed the judgment of a District Court that canceled a contingency fee contract and made an award based upon a quantum meruit basis because the County Court had previously approved the amount and reasonableness of the compensation via the contract; and the Court noted that compensating the lawyer based upon the contingency fee agreement appeared to be more meritorious than in Berryhill ).State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Flaniken, 2004 OK 6, ¶ 10, 85 P.3d 824, 827;Sneed v. Sneed, 1984 OK 22, 681 P.2d 754, 756.Sneed v. Sneed 1984 OK 22, 681 P.2d 754, 756 (cases involving minors impose a duty upon the trial court to protect the child's interest, and while a guardian ad litem has the power to employ and select counsel, the amount of attorney's fees is determined by the trial court, after consideration of all the attendant circumstances); Aubrey's Estate v. De Lozier, 1927 OK 7, 128 Okla. 79, 261 P. 192, 195 (we recognized the role of a court to provide protection to “helpless minors,” and we stated that “a deaf ear will never be turned to their cries of distress and supplication for justice, when called to the attention of this court on proper proceedings.”).

  2. State v. Gassaway

    2008 OK 60 (Okla. 2008)   Cited 15 times
    Holding that disbarment was warranted as disciplinary sanction for lawyer's misconduct, which included making false representations to judges and attempting to trade legal services for sexual favors and stating that "sexually suggestive gestures and remarks will not be tolerated."

    We agree with the PRT that if Smith-Hathorn has a dispute with Respondent regarding the fee she paid, such a claim is better suited for civil court and not this bar disciplinary proceeding. See State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Flaniken, 2004 OK 6, ¶ 9, 85 P.3d 824.