Opinion ID: 1116561
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Findings and Recommendations

Text: The local committee found, inter alia, that Bates obtained consent from Stein to file an action through ... Slavitt, Edelman and Weiser against Apostolof, Inc. with ... Bates, ... Jensen, and ... Stein named as plaintiffs and that the nature and extent of the attorney-client relationship between [that firm] and Stein is not clear. The local committee concluded that there was insufficient proof that petitioner wilfully violated rule 12 and recommended that the proceeding be dismissed. The board, without receiving additional evidence, unanimously adopted new findings. It found, inter alia, that ... At all pertinent times herein [petitioner] knew that ... Slavitt, Edelman et al., represented the plaintiffs [in the action in question] and [petitioner] ... failed to obtain the consent of [that] law firm ... to [the communication between petitioner and Stein on June 11, 1968]. The board also found, as did the local committee, that Stein told Apostolof that Stein had not authorized the filing of any action against Apostolof, Inc., that Apostolof told petitioner what Stein said, and that Stein thereafter similarly stated to petitioner that Slavitt, Edelman and Weiser had no authority to file the litigation on Stein's behalf.