律师职业道德

R. Bernhardt
{"title":"律师职业道德","authors":"R. Bernhardt","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2227185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Commentary on a recent California decision sanctioning an attorney for charging fees in advance for loan modification services and criticism of the requirement in light of its deterrent effect on lawyer’s willingness to undertake such services for low income borrowers.","PeriodicalId":364523,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Ethical Issues (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Attorney Ethics\",\"authors\":\"R. Bernhardt\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2227185\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Commentary on a recent California decision sanctioning an attorney for charging fees in advance for loan modification services and criticism of the requirement in light of its deterrent effect on lawyer’s willingness to undertake such services for low income borrowers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":364523,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LSN: Ethical Issues (Topic)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LSN: Ethical Issues (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2227185\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Ethical Issues (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2227185","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对加利福尼亚州最近一项决定的评论,该决定制裁了一名律师提前收取贷款修改服务费用,并批评了这一要求,因为它对律师为低收入借款人提供此类服务的意愿产生了威慑作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Attorney Ethics
Commentary on a recent California decision sanctioning an attorney for charging fees in advance for loan modification services and criticism of the requirement in light of its deterrent effect on lawyer’s willingness to undertake such services for low income borrowers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信