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
- December 10, 2025 Industry Alerts From Sales Pitch to Cease and Desist in Tennessee’s Wine Market
- December 08, 2025 Media Mentions Gregory Ewing was recently interviewed for an American Banker article, “How Ramp set up a data cloud to democratize AI.”
- December 4, 2025 In the News Two Dickinson Wright Attorneys Recognized in Lexology Index Thought Leaders Global Elite 2026
- December 4, 2025 In the News Yuri Chumak Recognized in Lexology Index 2026 Client Choice
- December 03, 2025 Articles CSA Proposes Semi-Annual Financial Reporting Pilot for Eligible Venture Issuers
- December 03, 2025 Industry Alerts TABC Tightens Rules on Hemp-Derived Cannabinoid Products, COAs, and Retail Sales
- December 3, 2025 In the News Ashley Miller Joins Dickinson Wright Seattle Office
- December 1, 2025 In the News Dickinson Wright Recognized by Leadership Council on Legal Diversity as a 2025 Compass Award Winner
- December 01, 2025 Articles Rising Scrutiny in Employment-Based Visas: What Employers Must Prepare For