Maryland State Bar Ass'n v. Robertson

Per Curiam Order. The Court having considered the memorandum of opinion and recommendation of the panel of Judges that Roy Lynn Robertson (a/k/a Rob Robertson) be reprimanded, the exceptions to the recommendation filed by the Bar Association, the answer thereto, and arguments of counsel, it is, this 10th day of September, 1975, ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, a majority of the Court concurring, that the recommendation of the panel be, and it is hereby, adopted, and it is further ⁵² ORDERED, that Roy Lynn Robertson (a/k/a Rob Robertson) be, and he is hereby, reprimanded. MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION OF PANEL Pursuant to the order of the Court of Appeals of Maryland, dated November 8th, 1974, the undersigned, Chief Judge and Judges of the Fifth Judicial Circuit of Maryland, conducted a hearing in the Circuit Court for Howard County on the Statement of Charges and Request for Disciplinary Action filed by the Maryland State Bar Association, Inc. against Roy Lynn Robertson (a/k/a Rob Robertson), a member of the Bar of the State of Maryland. At that hearing the parties agreed and stipulated to the matters and facts set forth in paragraphs 1 through 5 of said Statement of Charges.

Accordingly, to make a determination in this matter it became only necessary for us to review that stipulation and consider the arguments and persuasion of counsel and the Defendant. While contritely agreeing to the allegations that he has violated a disciplinary rule, improperly advertised himself as a lawyer, improperly identified himself as a lawyer in a publication of his affiliated business and improperly solicited representation of clients for himself, Mr. Robertson urges upon us the proposition that it was not the purpose of the letter (Plaintiff’s Exhibit A), which is the gravamen of this action, to foster these ends. He insists that the true explanation of the mailing is contained in the fifth paragraph thereof, as follows: “This exploratory letter is to