In re Mikus
New Mexico Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
{1} This attorney disciplinary proceeding comes before the Court pursuant to the Rules Governing Discipline. We are called upon to decide whether attorney Ronald D. Mikus (Respondent) engaged in conduct pri- or to his admission to the bar that warrants disciplinary sanctions. For the reasons that follow, we adopt the recommendation of the Disciplinary Board to suspend Respondent from the practice of law pursuant to Rule 17-206(A)(2) NMRA 2006.
BACKGROUND
{2} Prior to submitting his application for admission to the New Mexico Bar, Respondent and a former girlfriend traveled to Mexico and,…
3Cases cited17 opinions
- In re WongAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Tom Growney Equipment Co. v. JouettNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2005
- In Re ChandlerIllinois Supreme Court · 1994
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. ZdrokSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- Stratmore v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by2 opinions
- In the Matter of SteinNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2008
- In Re TreinenNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2006