Court Opinion

ID: 9550218
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 18:31:58.991348+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:17:52.177160
License: Public Domain

CARTER, J.
I dissent.
I agree that the letter written by petitioner to Nadel’s attorney constituted a technical violation of section 523 of the Penal Code, and should not, therefore, have been sent. But, considering petitioner’s background and the fact that the letter was written to an attorney regarding a claim against bis client involving a small sum of money, advising that petitioner’s client would go to the district attorney and seek to institute a criminal prosecution against Nadel unless the claim ivas paid, I do not feel that the discipline recommended is justified, and that a reprimand would be more commensurate with the nature of the conduct shown by the record. Petitioner, no doubt, mistakenly believed that the end he sought to achieve justified the means employed, and since no fraud or bad faith on his part was shown, and no detriment was suffered by anyone as the result of his conduct, a suspension of six months from practice seems too severe.
I would, therefore, dispose of the proceeding with a reprimand.