|CALENDAR STATUS: Active|
|In Re: David Herman|
|Supreme Court Case 1|
|Lawrence W. Erwin on behalf of David Herman|
Mary Cooper on behalf of the Oregon State Bar
Statement of Issues:
| The accused requests review of a decision of a trial panel of the Disciplinary Board, concluding that he had violated Rule of Professional Conduct (RPC) 8.4(a)(3) and that disbarment was the appropriate sanction. On review, the issues are:|
(1) Whether the trial panel erred in determining that the Bar had proved by clear and convincing evidence that the accused had converted profits or financial assets of a company that he had formed with two other individuals, amounting to dishonest conduct under RPC 8.4(a)(3);
(2) Whether the trial panel erred in determining that the Bar had proved by clear and convincing evidence that the accused had made two false statements in formal documentation that dissolved the company, amounting to misrepresentations under RPC 8.4(a)(3); and
(3) If the trial panel did not err in finding the disciplinary violations, whether disbarment is the appropriate sanction.
The foregoing summary of a Supreme Court case that is scheduled for oral argument has been prepared for the benefit of the public. Parties and practitioners should rely on neither the factual summary set out above, nor the statement of issues to be decided, as delineating the questions that the Supreme Court ultimately may consider on review. See generally Oregon Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.20.
Justice(s) NOT Participating: