Legal Opinion

Lashkowitz v. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of North Dakota Ex Rel. Halpern

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided July 28, 1987No. Civ. 870013PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MESCHKE, Justice.

Attorney Shelley Lashkowitz is the respondent in a disciplinary proceeding. He petitions this court to issue a supervisory writ to a Hearing Panel for the Disciplinary Board. Lashkowitz seeks to vacate an order denying him discovery and to compel the Disciplinary Board to respond to his interrogatories and requests for production of documents. We conclude that a supervisory writ is appropriate. We hold that an attorney who is a respondent in a formal disciplinary proceeding can use discovery authorized by the rules of civil procedure.

After investigation and informal…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. County of Stutsman v. State Historical Society of North DakotaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
  2. State v. MankeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court v. MaragosNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Heartview Foundation v. GlaserNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Marmon v. HodnyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1980

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Heinle v. HeinleNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Gillette v. North Dakota Disciplinary Board CounselCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2010
  3. In Re Disciplinary Action Against McGuireNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Polum v. North Dakota District CourtNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Toth v. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of North DakotaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API