Legal Opinion · Dissent

Disciplinary Board of Supreme Court of State v. Peterson

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided September 26, 1989No. Civ. 880295Published

1DissentVande Walle, Justice

In Disciplinary Bd. v. Ellis, 418 N.W.2d 788 (N.D.1988), we concluded that the hearing panel should have granted a request for a continuance because it was supported by a plausible medical reason that Ellis could not attend the scheduled hearing. Although not supported by a letter from a physician, the record in this ease reflects at least as plausible a reason that Peterson’s counsel could not attend the hearing. It reflects that as a result of the previous deposition disciplinary counsel was aware of the nature, if not the seriousness, of the illness of Peterson’s counsel. I therefore do…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. In Re Disbarment of EatonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of North Dakota v. EllisNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1988

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

Powered by the Exa API