Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Davis v. Alabama State Bar

676 So. 2d 306 (1996)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 35,600+ case briefs...

Davis v. Alabama State Bar

Alabama Supreme Court

676 So. 2d 306 (1996)

Facts

Attorneys William Davis III and Dan Goldberg (the partners) (defendants) were the only partners at the law firm Davis and Goldberg. The firm spent $500,000 annually advertising efficient, high-quality legal services, especially bankruptcy and social security filings, attracting a huge number of clients. To minimize expenses and maximize profits, associates took prospective client calls, but secretaries helped clients fill out paperwork and file claims. The firm essentially neglected cases and instructed associates not to return existing client calls or have any client contact until just before the first court appearance. Each associate had a limit on time spent with a client, a quota of new client files to open each month, and nearly 600 clients to represent and cases to manage. The Alabama State Bar Disciplinary Board (plaintiff) charged the partners with violating multiple ethics rules. Several former associates, secretaries, and clients testified at the hearing. One client whose dying husband’s social security benefits were delayed testified that the firm lost his paperwork multiple times, lied about filing his claim, and ultimately advised that the deadline to file had expired. The firm’s own expert testified that one attorney could not possibly handle the number of cases the firm assigned an associate. The board found the partners had violated eight ethics rules and suspended both from practicing law for 60 days but acquitted on the charge of false and misleading advertising. The partners appealed, arguing that the proceeding amounted to a “witch-hunt” because the bar did not approve of the firm’s advertising practices. The court upheld the board’s findings and the 60-day suspension. The partners requested rehearing, arguing that the allegations of false and misleading advertising did not warrant suspension.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Maddox, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 618,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 618,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 618,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 35,600 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership