In re Baluss
28 Mich. 507, 1874 Mich. LEXIS 20
Opinion
This was a proceeding which sought to have the name .of respondent stricken from the roll of attorneys for professional misbehavior. While not strictly a criminal prosecution, it is of that nature, and the punishment, in prohibiting the party following his ordinary occupation, would he severe and highly penal. The majority of the court are not satisfied that the evidence gives such clear support to the charges as should be required in such cases, and the application will therefore be denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
In re Baluss, 28 Mich. 507, 1874 Mich. LEXIS 20 (Mich. 1874).
28 Mich. 507 (In re Baluss) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State Bar Grievance Administrator v. Posler
213 N.W.2d 133 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1973)
State Bar Grievance Administrator v. Jackson
211 N.W.2d 38 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1973)
State Bar Grievance Administrator v. Freid
202 N.W.2d 692 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1972)
State Bar of Michigan v. Woll
194 N.W.2d 835 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1972)
In re Coburn & Glocheski
174 N.W. 134 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1919)
In re Humphreys
15 Haw. 155 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1903)
In re Clink
117 Mich. 619 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1898)
State v. Byrkett
3 Ohio N.P. 28 (Miami County Court of Common Pleas, 1894)
In re Achi
8 Haw. 216 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1891)