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
- February 26, 2026 Industry Alerts FinCEN Simplifies CDD Requirements for Financial Institutions
- February 24, 2026 In the News Dickinson Wright recently authored an article for DBusiness Magazine titled “Bridging Borders.”
- February 23, 2026 In the News Aleanna Siacon Named Co-President of the Michigan Asian Pacific American Bar Association
- February 23, 2026 In the News Three Dickinson Wright Attorneys Named to Crain Detroit Business 2026 Notable Women in Law
- February 23, 2026 In the News Andrew T. Kim Joins Dickinson Wright Chicago Office
- February 20, 2026 Industry Alerts Major Development: Supreme Court Decision on IEEPA Tariffs
- February 20, 2026 Media Mentions Michael Gnesin was recently interviewed on the podcast, “3 Questions with Wayne Baxter” by One Capital Management.
- February 19, 2026 Industry Alerts Trump Administration Prohibits SBA Loans to Noncitizens
- February 18, 2026 In the News Jason Powell Joins Dickinson Wright Austin Office as a Member