Ethics Opinion 076
Validity of Group Legal Service Programs under recent United States Supreme Court Decisions. |
Ethics Opinion 077
Erection of public sign at site of proposed new office building. |
Ethics Opinion 078
Improper for attorney to accept retainer from corporate client to represent employees in real estate transactions resulting from corporation personnel transfers. |
Ethics Opinion 079
Judicial Ethics - Judges - avoidance of impropriety in relationship with relatives and former partner. |
Ethics Opinion 080
Validity of Group Legal Service Program to handle grievance claims of dissident union members. |
Ethics Opinion 081
Telephone and City Directory listings |
Ethics Opinion 082
Partners or associates defending criminal matters in county where one associate is part-time assistant district attorney. |
Ethics Opinion 083
Former association on announcement card; to whom may cards be mailed; publicity of opening office. |
Ethics Opinion 084
Legal services to friends, corporate employees, other corporations. |
Ethics Opinion 085
Designation as patent attorney on letterhead, announcements and their distribution. |
Ethics Opinion 086
Announcement of labor relations law practice, but not referring to representation of management, is proper. |
Ethics Opinion 087
Interest charges on delinquent accounts. |
Ethics Opinion 088
Election Campaign Activities of Judicial Office Holders |
Ethics Opinion 089
Publication of legal articles in newspapers and magazines |
Ethics Opinion 091
Political Contributions |
Ethics Opinion 092
A sign with lettering of over 3 inches in height is undignified and is advertising. |
Ethics Opinion 093
Improper for lawyers to join labor union which includes non-lawyer members. |
Ethics Opinion 094
Solicitation should be by campaign committees and contributions should not be unreasonable in amount. |
Ethics Opinion 095
Law office accounting information supplied to a data processor. |
Ethics Opinion 096
Improper for a lawyer to defend an appeal for a new client when a successful defense would be detrimental to the interests of a former client in a related matter. |
|
