In re Roberts

Arizona Supreme Court

In re Roberts

804 P.2d 758, 167 Ariz. 29, 1990 Ariz. LEXIS 274

CourtArizona Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 21, 1990

DocketComm. Nos. 87-0779, 87-0829, 87-0842 and 89-0509

StatusPublished

This text of 804 P.2d 758 (In re Roberts) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Arizona 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 Roberts, 804 P.2d 758, 167 Ariz. 29, 1990 Ariz. LEXIS 274 (Ark. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

JUDGMENT OF CENSURE

This matter having come on for review before the Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Arizona, it having duly rendered its decision, and no timely appeal therefrom having been filed,

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that:

1. NEAL TAYLOR ROBERTS, a member of the State Bar of Arizona is hereby censured and condemned for conduct unworthy of and in violation of his duties and obligations as a lawyer, as disclosed in the captioned proceedings.

2. Respondent shall pay to the State Bar of Arizona costs and expenses incurred in this matter in the sum of $3605.03 to be paid pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in the Commission’s Order of Probation entered November 12, 1990.

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

JUDGMENT OF CENSURE

This matter having come on for review before the Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Arizona, it having duly rendered its decision, and no timely appeal therefrom having been filed,

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that:

1. NEAL TAYLOR ROBERTS, a member of the State Bar of Arizona is hereby censured and condemned for conduct unworthy of and in violation of his duties and obligations as a lawyer, as disclosed in the captioned proceedings.

2. Respondent shall pay to the State Bar of Arizona costs and expenses incurred in this matter in the sum of $3605.03 to be paid pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in the Commission’s Order of Probation entered November 12, 1990.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

804 P.2d 758, 167 Ariz. 29, 1990 Ariz. LEXIS 274, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-roberts-ariz-1990.