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 01, 2025 Industry Alerts Texas Passes TRAIGA: What the New AI Law Means for Your Business
- June 30, 2025 Industry Alerts QuickHits: DOJ’s FCPA Shift and Impacts on U.S.-China Operations
- June 30, 2025 In the News Nine Dickinson Wright Attorneys Recognized in Nevada Business's Top Rank Attorneys 2025
- June 30, 2025 In the News Two Dickinson Wright Lawyers Recognized in 2025 Northern California Super Lawyers, One Named Rising Star
- June 27, 2025 In the News Thomas Vitale Joins Dickinson Wright Ann Arbor Office as a Member
- June 26, 2025 In the News Lindsey Specht Joins Dickinson Wright Washington, D.C. Office
- June 26, 2025 In the News Two Dickinson Wright Attorneys Recognized in Florida Super Lawyers
- June 26, 2025 In the News Evans Ngondo Joins Dickinson Wright Toronto Office
- June 23, 2025 In the News Thomas Philbrick Joins Dickinson Wright Detroit Office