State v. McCoy

22 Citing cases

  1. State, ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Johnson

    2024 OK 62 (Okla. 2024)   Cited 1 times

    Rule 5.2, RGDP. In State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. McCoy, 2010 OK 67, ¶33, 240 P.3d 675, 686, we determined that failure of a lawyer to respond to the OBA's investigative inquiries is a serious offense which causes utilization of greater resources and creates substantial delays in addressing complaints of clients who have already suffered the lawyer's procrastination. We hold the Complainant has proven by clear and convincing evidence the Respondent violated Rule 5.2, RGDP.

  2. State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Kaufman

    2022 OK 69 (Okla. 2022)   Cited 1 times

    In Scott we first reviewed our opinions that imposed the discipline of suspension from the practice of law for two years and one day. The two cases reviewed were State of Oklahoma ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Whitebook, 2010 OK 72, 242 P.3d 517 and State of Oklahoma ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. McCoy, 2010 OK 67, 240 P.3d 675. ¶27 In Whitebook, an attorney was hired by two separate clients for work on probate matters.

  3. State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Mortensen

    2023 OK 32 (Okla. 2023)   Cited 1 times

    ¶81 In State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. McCoy, 2010 OK 67, 240 P.3d 675, the respondent was retained by numerous clients to pursue post-conviction relief on their behalf.

  4. State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Scott

    2022 OK 1 (Okla. 2022)   Cited 6 times
    In State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Scott, 2022 OK 1, 502 P.3d 1101, the respondent was hired by two separate clients to assist them in setting up medical marijuana dispensaries. Despite accepting retainers from both clients, the respondent failed to provide any legal services to either client and eventually stopped responding to their communications.

    Id. ¶ 26, 242 P.3d at 523. ¶27 In State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. McCoy, 2010 OK 67, 240 P.3d 675, the respondent faced numerous counts of misconduct alleging, among other things, that he failed to diligently pursue cases on behalf of several clients, failed to communicate with them regarding the status of their cases, and failed to return thousands of dollars in unearned fees. The respondent also admitted that he failed to respond to some of the clients' grievances and provided misleading and inadequate responses to others.

  5. State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Abdoveis

    2024 OK 55 (Okla. 2024)

    State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. McCoy, 2010 OK 67, ¶25, 240 P.3d 675, 684. The major cause of Abdoveis' misconduct appears to be attributed to his caseload.

  6. State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Messerli

    2024 OK 56 (Okla. 2024)

    ¶ 35 Mitigating circumstances may be considered when assessing the appropriate quantum of discipline. State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. McCoy, 2010 OK 67, ¶ 25, 240 P.3d 675, 684

  7. State v. Nichols

    2021 OK 28 (Okla. 2021)   Cited 3 times

    However, neither the findings of fact of the trial panel nor its view of the evidence or the credibility of witnesses binds this Court. See State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. McCoy, 2010 OK 67, ¶ 6, 240 P.3d 675, 679. The PRT's recommendation is merely advisory.

  8. State v. Weigel

    321 P.3d 168 (Okla. 2014)   Cited 3 times
    Using the term "nonrefundable retainer" to represent an advance payment of fees for hours of legal services that the attorney will perform in the future is impermissible

    A disability does not immunize one from disciplinary measures and there must be shown a causal relationship between the condition and the professional misconduct. State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. McCoy, 2010 OK 67, ¶ 25, 240 P.3d 675. The Respondent did not raise Rule 10 as a defense and we have not considered factors involved in a Rule 10 proceeding. State ex rel Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Young, 2007 OK 92, ¶ 39, 175 P.3d 371.

  9. State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Weigel

    2014 OK 4 (Okla. 2014)   Cited 3 times

    A disability does not immunize one from disciplinary measures and there must be shown a causal relationship between the condition and the professional misconduct. State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. McCoy, 2010 OK 67, ¶25, 240 P.3d 675. The Respondent did not raise Rule 10 as a defense and we have not considered factors involved in a Rule 10 proceeding.State ex rel Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Young, 2007 OK 92, ¶39, 175 P.3d 371.

  10. State v. Wilcox

    2014 OK 1 (Okla. 2014)   Cited 15 times
    Concluding conviction for stalking wife of local judge was demonstrative of attorney's lack of respect for the judiciary

    To make such a determination, this Court must be presented with a record sufficient to permit an independent, on-the-record review for the crafting of appropriate discipline. State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. McCoy, 2010 OK 67, ¶ 6, 240 P.3d 675;State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Schraeder, 2002 OK 51, ¶ 6, 51 P.3d 570. It is the view of this Court that the record before us is sufficient to make such a determination. I.