IN THE MATTER OF RALPH J. BAKER
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Ralph J. Baker, a member of the Supreme Court bar, failed to deposit a $15.45 check issued to him as counsel and ignored four letters from the Court's clerk requesting an explanation over the course of months. The Court reprimanded Baker for his unjustified failure to respond to the clerk's communications and discharged the rule to show cause, declining to disbar him after he apologized and deposited the check.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
The clerk of this Court having reported the failure of Ralph J. Baker, a member of the Bar of this Court to deposit a check of the clerk of this Court for $15.45 issued to him on November 10, 1934, as counsel for petitioner in the case of Central Iron & Steel Co. v. United States, No. 80, October Term, 1934; and it appearing to the Court that Ralph J. Baker had failed to answer or respond to four letters sent him by the Clerk of this Court under dates of February 1, 1935, February 28, 1935, April 6, 1935, and November 2, 1935, with respect to the said check; and a rule having issued December 9, 1935, directing him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of the law in this Court for conduct unbecoming a member of the Bar of this Court; and Ralph J. Baker, having made return to the rule, apologizing for his neglect, and the check issued to him having been deposited.
Mr. Ralph J. Baker, pro se.
It is ordered that the respondent, Ralph J. Baker, be, and he is hereby, reprimanded for unjustified failure in a duty owed by him as'a member of the Bar of this Court to respond to communications addressed to him by the Clerk of this Court pertaining to the business of the Court;
And it is further ordered that the rule to show\ cause aforesaid be, and it is hereby, discharged.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Jacobs, 306 U.S. 363 (U.S. 1939)…S. 497. Phillips v. Dime Trust & Safe Deposit Co., 284 U. S. 160. Third National Bank & Trust Co. v. White, 287 U. S. 577; Helvering v. Bowers, 303 U. S. 618. Knox v. McElligott, supra; Gwinn v. Commissioner, 287 U. S. 224; Cahn v. United States, 297 U. S. 691. See Nichols v. Coolidge, supra, p. 542; Tyler v. United States, supra, p. 505; Helvering v. City Bank Co., 296 U. S. 85, 90.…
-
Dimock v. Corwin, 99 F.2d 799 (2d Cir. 1938)…vent which occurred at death would have justified the tax if Congress had attempted to reach the entire joint estate. As to this decision so limited, see Griswold v. Helvering, Com’r, 290 U.S. 56, 54 S.Ct. 5, 78 L.Ed. 166, and Calm v. United States, 297 U.S. 691, 56 S.Ct. 384, 80 L.Ed. 985. Tyler v. United States, 281 U.S. 497, 50 S. Ct. 356, 74 L.Ed. 991, 69 A.L.R. 758, involved an estate by the entirety. Upon the death of the husband, who had initiated during his life-time a transaction which resulted af…
-
Jacobs v. United States, 97 F.2d 784 (7th Cir. 1938)…f Appeals is reversed and the case remanded [*787] for further proceedings in accordance -with this opinion.” .Subsequent thereto the Tyler Case, dealing with estates by the entirety, was decided, but still later in Cahn, Executor v. United States, 297 U.S. 691, 56 S.Ct. 384, 80 L.Ed. 985, the Supreme Court adhered to Knox v. McElligott, supra, and reversed the Court of Claims, whose decision is published in 10 F.Supp. 577. The lower court held that the entire value of joint tenancy property should be incl…