Lawyer Brian Radnoff Quoted in Canadian Lawyer Article on Legal Disciplinary Case
- Media Mentions
Want to get our alerts?
Click “Subscribe Now” to get attorney insights on the latest developments in a range of services and industries.
Lawyer Brian Radnoff was recently quoted in the Canadian Lawyer article “Case against Law Society of Ontario allowed to move forward”.
A panel of Ontario Court of Appeal judges recently allowed the appeal of a lawyer who amended his claim that the Law Society of Ontario’s disciplinary process amounted to wrongful abuse of power. The case, Robson v. The Law Society of Upper Canada, will now proceed in Superior Court on the part of the appeal related to malicious prosecution and the question of what constituted malice.
Mr. Radnoff, a commercial litigator who also represents lawyers in disciplinary cases, says that such cases are difficult to make on the merits, even if they proceed past the pleadings stage.
“There are some circumstances – this perhaps is one of those cases – where you have to be very careful,” Mr. Radnoff says. “It is very unfair to the party to basically say you are bound by this obiter decision where you either only had a limited opportunity to make representations or didn’t make representations at all on this issue, and now you are bound by this. And you are guilty of professional [misconduct]. This is another one of those cases that shows where there is a fine line in terms of preventing people from relitigating what other judges have said in what could be obiter decisions.”
To read the full article, please click here.
A panel of Ontario Court of Appeal judges recently allowed the appeal of a lawyer who amended his claim that the Law Society of Ontario’s disciplinary process amounted to wrongful abuse of power. The case, Robson v. The Law Society of Upper Canada, will now proceed in Superior Court on the part of the appeal related to malicious prosecution and the question of what constituted malice.
Mr. Radnoff, a commercial litigator who also represents lawyers in disciplinary cases, says that such cases are difficult to make on the merits, even if they proceed past the pleadings stage.
“There are some circumstances – this perhaps is one of those cases – where you have to be very careful,” Mr. Radnoff says. “It is very unfair to the party to basically say you are bound by this obiter decision where you either only had a limited opportunity to make representations or didn’t make representations at all on this issue, and now you are bound by this. And you are guilty of professional [misconduct]. This is another one of those cases that shows where there is a fine line in terms of preventing people from relitigating what other judges have said in what could be obiter decisions.”
To read the full article, please click here.
Recent Insights
- April 10, 2026 In the News Andrea Arndt Named Patent Prosecutor of the Year (South) by Managing IP Awards 2026
- April 10, 2026 Media Mentions John Krieger was recently quoted in a Law 360 article, “NCAA's Anti-Sports Betting Stance Becomes An IP Issue.”
- April 9, 2026 In the News Dickinson Wright Featured in ALL ACCESS with Andy Garcia
- April 9, 2026 In the News Sharae’ Williams Named a “Top 40 Under 40” Honoree by the National Bar Association
- April 07, 2026 Blogs Lundin Mining v. Markowich: How the Supreme Court Is Shaping Disclosure Practices
- April 06, 2026 Industry Alerts CBP Reports Continued Progress on CAPE System for IEEPA Refunds
- April 03, 2026 In the News Hale Stewart authored an article, “An Explanation of Captive Insurance Arrangements from Formation to Ongoing Compliance,” for The Journal of Texas Insurance Law.
- April 02, 2026 Industry Alerts FCC Targets Offshore Customer Service and Foreign Robocalls in New Proposal
- April 01, 2026 Blogs Spousal Privilege: ‘Til Litigation Do Us Part