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
- July 07, 2026 Podcasts DW FastTrack Podcast Episode 14: Captive Corner: Understanding Insurance Pricing
- July 02, 2026 Industry Alerts DEA Registration Window Closes, Questions Remain Open
- July 01, 2026 Industry Alerts Supreme Court Strikes Down Federal Limits on Party Coordinated Spending
- June 30, 2026 In the News Two Dickinson Wright Lawyers Recognized in 2026 Northern California Super Lawyers
- June 26, 2026 In the News Two Dickinson Wright Attorneys Named 2026 Florida Super Lawyers, One Named A Rising Star
- June 25, 2026 In the News Osie Ukwuoma Joins Dickinson Wright Toronto Office as a Partner
- June 23, 2026 Media Mentions Trent Cornell and Andrew Eres were recently quoted in the Chicago Lawyer article, "Expanding its Horizon."
- June 19, 2026 Media Mentions Hector Agdeppa was recently quoted in a Law360 article, “One And Done? Patent Examiner Interviews Now Hard To Get.”
- June 18, 2026 In the News John Desmond, Alexis Taitel, Alice Samberg, Mackenzie Robinson, and Peter Dragovich co-authored the “Law & Practice” article in the USA 2026 Dispute Resolution Practice Guide by Chambers & Partners.