In arguments before Austin’s Third Court of Appeals, a man whose grievance against a lawyer was dismissed argued that attorney discipline administrators misinterpreted rules and acted outside of their authority when they denied him a copy of their dismissal recommendation.
The “John Doe” litigant was the first of at least three people within the past 14 months who have voiced concerns and raised questions about the reasons why the State Bar of Texas Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel (CDC) and other entities in the attorney disciplinary system dismiss grievances, and the information they share with complainants about dismissals.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
