In re Complaint as to the Professional Conduct of Shea

Oregon Supreme Court

In re Complaint as to the Professional Conduct of Shea

232 P.2d 821, 191 Or. 635, 1951 Ore. LEXIS 235

DecidedJune 13, 1951

StatusPublished

This text of 232 P.2d 821 (In re Complaint as to the Professional Conduct of Shea) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Complaint as to the Professional Conduct of Shea, 232 P.2d 821, 191 Or. 635, 1951 Ore. LEXIS 235 (Or. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

On 6 July 1950 an amended complaint, comprising ten separate counts, was filed with the Board of Governors of the Oregon State Bar, charging the defendant, John Walton Shea, with violation of the rules of professional conduct promulgated by the Oregon State Bar and charging among other things, the misappropriation of funds. By way of answer, the defendant filed an affidavit, purporting to explain some of the charges and asking leniency. The cause was heard by a trial committee, and the defendant appeared personally and testified. The committee made findings of fact and conclusions of law, whereby the defendant was declared guilty upon six counts of the complaint. Permanent disbarment was recommended. Thereafter, the Board of Governors considered the record, exhibits, [636]*636findings and recommendations of the trial committee, again found the defendant guilty, and recommended to this Court that he he permanently disbarred. The record, the findings and recommendations in the above entitled matter now come before this Court for adoption, modification or rejection under the provisions of O.C.L.A., § 47-213. Pursuant to that section, the defendant was allowed sixty days from 14 March 1951 (the date of the decision of the Board of Governors) within which to petition the Court for a review of said recommendations. No petition has been filed. The record shows that in 1932 the defendant was tried and convicted for the crime of issuance of checks without funds, and at that time resigned as an attorney. He was reinstated by this Court on 11 September 1945, three judges dissenting.

Based upon the record before us, the Court now adopts the “order of recommendation” of the Board of Governors and the defendant is permanently disbarred.

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

PER CURIAM:

On 6 July 1950 an amended complaint, comprising ten separate counts, was filed with the Board of Governors of the Oregon State Bar, charging the defendant, John Walton Shea, with violation of the rules of professional conduct promulgated by the Oregon State Bar and charging among other things, the misappropriation of funds. By way of answer, the defendant filed an affidavit, purporting to explain some of the charges and asking leniency. The cause was heard by a trial committee, and the defendant appeared personally and testified. The committee made findings of fact and conclusions of law, whereby the defendant was declared guilty upon six counts of the complaint. Permanent disbarment was recommended. Thereafter, the Board of Governors considered the record, exhibits, [636]*636findings and recommendations of the trial committee, again found the defendant guilty, and recommended to this Court that he he permanently disbarred. The record, the findings and recommendations in the above entitled matter now come before this Court for adoption, modification or rejection under the provisions of O.C.L.A., § 47-213. Pursuant to that section, the defendant was allowed sixty days from 14 March 1951 (the date of the decision of the Board of Governors) within which to petition the Court for a review of said recommendations. No petition has been filed. The record shows that in 1932 the defendant was tried and convicted for the crime of issuance of checks without funds, and at that time resigned as an attorney. He was reinstated by this Court on 11 September 1945, three judges dissenting.

Based upon the record before us, the Court now adopts the “order of recommendation” of the Board of Governors and the defendant is permanently disbarred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

232 P.2d 821, 191 Or. 635, 1951 Ore. LEXIS 235, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-complaint-as-to-the-professional-conduct-of-shea-or-1951.