Title: In re Odman
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: S44782
State: Oregon
Issuer: Oregon Supreme Court
Date: September 23, 1998

FILED:  SEPTEMBER 23, 1998 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

In re Complaint as to 
the Conduct of

DENNIS M. ODMAN,

Accused.

(OSB 95-98; SC S44782)

	En Banc

	On review of the decision of a Trial Panel of the
Disciplinary Board.

	Argued and submitted September 10, 1998.

	Wayne Mackeson, Portland, argued the cause and filed
the brief for the accused.

	Mary A. Cooper, Disciplinary Counsel, Lake Oswego,
argued the cause and filed the briefs for the Oregon State Bar.

	PER CURIAM

	Complaint dismissed.

	PER CURIAM

	In this disciplinary proceeding, the Oregon State Bar
(Bar) alleges that the accused violated DR 5-105(E) (prohibiting
multiple client representation that results in a likely conflict
of interest unless the clients consent after full disclosure) and
DR 6-101(A) (requiring competent representation) in the course of
creating a revocable trust.  Following a hearing, the trial panel
of the Disciplinary Board filed its written decision concluding
that the accused was not guilty of the alleged misconduct.  ORS
9.536(1); BR 10.1.  The Bar seeks review and asks the court to
reject the trial panel's decision and to impose a sanction.  

	This court reviews the matter de novo on the record. 
ORS 9.536(3); BR 10.6.  The Bar has the burden of establishing
misconduct by clear and convincing evidence.  BR 5.2.

	This court has reviewed the record and has considered
the arguments of the parties.  The court concludes that the Bar
has not proved, by clear and convincing evidence, that the
accused committed the alleged disciplinary rule violations.  A
detailed explanation of the basis for the court's conclusion
would not serve the interests of the parties or the public.

	Complaint dismissed.