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
- June 16, 2026 Industry Alerts Ohio Opens Nomination Window for Opportunity Zones 2.0 Designations
- June 16, 2026 In the News John Desmond, Alexis Taitel, and Alice Samberg co-authored the “Trends & Developments” article in the USA 2026 Dispute Resolution Practice Guide by Chambers & Partners.
- June 15, 2026 In the News Andrea Arndt’s article, “Copyrights on YouTube: Enforcement and Reality,” was recently published in Inventors Digest.
- June 12, 2026 Industry Alerts USTR Proposes New Section 301 Tariffs for Forced Labor Enforcement
- June 11, 2026 In the News Dave Stern and Corey Hock Join Dickinson Wright Toronto Office
- June 11, 2026 In the News Aaron Burrell Sworn In as President of the Oakland County Bar Association
- June 11, 2026 In the News Erin Cobane’s article, “Recent Amendments to the Marketable Record Title Act: What Every Real Estate Attorney Should Know,” was published in The State Bar of Michigan’s Michigan Real Property Review.
- June 11, 2026 In the News Michael Beckwith's article, “West Coast Health Cos. Must Brace for Federal Enforcement,” was recently published in Law360.
- June 10, 2026 In the News Dickinson Wright Recognized in Legal 500 United States 2026 Edition