Attorney Grievance Commission v. Wright , 306 Md. 93 ( 1986 )


Menu:
  • COLE, Judge,

    concurring.

    The majority opinion is a sterling admonition to counsel to charge a fee commensurate with the legal services rendered. However, it is not a review of the case presented to, *107argued before, and decided by Judge Thieme. The issue before Judge Thieme was whether the fees charged by the respondent under the circumstances described were clearly excessive and unreasonable. As proof of each side’s position, three eminent and outstanding members of the Bar testified. Judge Thieme was unpersuaded by either side, and he thus concluded that Bar Counsel had not met his burden. The issue for us is simple: were Judge Thieme’s conclusions clearly erroneous? We cannot say that they were, and for this reason, we should affirm the judgment. Hence, I concur.

Document Info

Docket Number: Misc. (Subtitle BV) No. 14, September Term, 1985

Citation Numbers: 507 A.2d 618, 306 Md. 93, 1986 Md. LEXIS 228

Judges: Cole, R0d0wsky

Filed Date: 5/2/1986

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/10/2024