Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

In Re Cruickshanks

West Virginia Supreme Court

Decided June 29, 2007No. 33336Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partAlbright, Justice

I stand by my previously stated position1 that this Court unquestionably has the disciplinary authority to withhold the pay of a judicial officer during suspension, but I remain equally committed in believing that the guiding force for exerting that power must be fairness determined by a balanced assessment of the circumstances. That goal was simply not reached in the majority opinion, and the new syllabus point adopted by the majority does nothing to promote such a just and balanced evaluation.

Syllabus point three in the majority opinion states:

Always mindful of the primary consideration of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In Re CruickshanksWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2007
  2. State ex rel. Ghiz v. JohnsonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1971
  3. In Re McCourtWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API