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 31, 2025 In the News Four Dickinson Wright Attorneys Recognized in Washington State Super Lawyers, Two Named Rising Stars
- July 30, 2025 In the News J. Morgan Dixon Joins Dickinson Wright Chicago Office
- July 29, 2025 Industry Alerts Tennessee Update: TABC to Honor Existing Agriculture Licenses for Hemp-Derived Products
- July 28, 2025 In the News Daniel Quick Named a ‘Go To Lawyer’ for Business Litigation by Michigan Lawyers Weekly
- July 28, 2025 Media Mentions The Real Deal recently quoted Charles Brecker in the article “Court’s decision in Two Roads’ buyout case won’t kill all condo deals, experts say.”
- July 28, 2025 In the News John Cunningham was recently interviewed for a Supply Chain Brain video, “What’s in DOJ’s New Guidelines for FCPA Enforcement.”
- July 25, 2025 Articles Ohio’s Cyber Law For Local Governments: 5 Steps Over 75 Days to Meet the September 29 Deadline
- July 24, 2025 In the News Dickinson Wright Receives Top Rankings in Chambers 2025 High Net Worth Guide
- July 23, 2025 Articles 2025 Patent Filing Costs Rise: USPTO Fee Update and Response Strategies