Padilla v. Commission for Lawyer Discipline
Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
PHIL HARDBERGER, Chief Justice.
Ricardo G. Padilla (“Padilla”) appeals his disbarment. Padilla raises three points of error, contending: (1) he was not given 45 days notice as required by rule 245 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure; (2) trial de novo in the district court was improper; and (3) the trial court improperly considered hearsay evidence in rendering its decision. We overrule each of Padilla’s points of error and affirm the trial court’s judgment.
Background
The Commission for Lawyer Discipline (“Commission”) filed a disciplinary petition against Padilla based on a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
3Cited by7 opinions
- Michael Abend v. Federal National Mortgage AssociationCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2015
- Hoog v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2002
- $2,424.21 in U.S. Currency and 2013 Volkswagen Passat v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2019
- Eufemia Z. Campos and Hortensia Greene v. Nueces County, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2008
- Templeton Mortgage Corporation v. Gary M. Poenisch, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2015
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.