Court Opinion

ID: 9743254
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 21:29:14.035417+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:40.082329
License: Public Domain

Wilkins, J.
(concurring). If this were a matter in which I were to permit my own opinion to control my vote, I would concur with the Board of Bar Overseers and Bar Counsel that public discipline is in order in each case.1 believe, however, that in matters of bar discipline individual Justices of this court should adhere to the view of the majority of the Justices in order to provide, as far as possible, uniform discipline for substantially similar misconduct. I, therefore, join in the result reached by the court in each case.

 The Canons of Professional Ethics, adopted by the American Bar Association in 1908, provided in Canon 11 that “[m]oney of the client or collected for the client. . . should not under any circumstances be commingled with his own or be used by him.” See R.L. Wise, Legal Ethics 425 (2d ed. 1970). These canons were long recognized “as establishing wholesome standards of professional action.” Matter of Cohen, 261 Mass. 484, 487 (1928).