Opinion ID: 170095
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Sufficiency-of-the-evidence arguments

Text: Other issues listed by Mr. Oliver concern the sufficiency of the evidence. His statement-of-issues section states that the final conclusion of dishonesty was impermissible where the trial judge [sic] concluded to the contrary that there existed no evidence of dishonesty or selfish motive and that the evidence does not support a determination that he violated the specified Utah Rules of Professional Conduct. Aplt. Br. at 9-10. Mr. Oliver's factual discussion calls the Panel's references to dishonesty false outlandish insinuations. Id. at 20. His argument section, however, fails to formulate a legal argument based on this issue. As we have stated, [s]cattered statements in the appellant's brief are not enough to preserve an issue for appeal. Christian Heritage Acad., 483 F.3d at 1031 (quotation omitted). Mr. Oliver has abandoned this argument on appeal. Finally, and most importantly, this court has no difficulty in agreeing with the Panel that Mr. Oliver's conduct violated the applicable rules of professional responsibility. In suspending Mr. Oliver from the practice of law, placing him on three-year probation upon readmission, requiring re-organization of his practice, and ordering a public reprimand, the Panel did not abuse its discretion. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.