In Re Burris

81 P. 1077, 147 Cal. 370, 1905 Cal. LEXIS 405
California Supreme Court·Decided July 29, 1905·No. No. 21,036.·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

THE COURT.

This is a petition for the modification of ' an order of disbarment heretofore entered against the petitioner.

The order was made more than ten years ago upon a charge. of professional misconduct involving no criminality, and no serious wrong to any one, though inexcusable in itself. Since, that time, as we learn from the testimonials accompanying the petition, the petitioner has been living, a life of probity, industry, and sobriety. These testimonials are signed by a number of judges of the superior court, and by many prominent attorneys of the counties where the petitioner was engaged in practice prior to the order of disbarment. His restoration to the bar is also recommended by the judge in whose court the matter was pending, out of which the charge of misconduct arose.

In view of this strong testimony in his favor, we are of *371 the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to the modification which he asks.

It is therefore ordered that the said John F. Burris be and he is hereby restored as an attorney and counselor of this court, and that his name be reinstated upon the roll of attorneys thereof.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In Re Burris, 81 P. 1077, 147 Cal. 370, 1905 Cal. LEXIS 405 (Cal. 1905).

81 P. 1077 (In Re Burris) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Preston v. State Bar
171 P.2d 435 (California Supreme Court, 1946)
Burns v. State
76 S.W.2d 172 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1934)
In Re Cate
212 P. 694 (California Court of Appeal, 1922)
Bar Assn. of S. F. v. Cantrell
200 P. 968 (California Court of Appeal, 1921)
In Re Mash
179 P. 897 (California Court of Appeal, 1919)
In Re Thompson
174 P. 86 (California Court of Appeal, 1918)