Opinion ID: 2633460
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Authorization of the Petition

Text: As a preliminary matter, Bonet asserts that this court should deny the WSBA's Petition for Review on the basis that the petition contains only the signature of the chief disciplinary counsel and lacks authorization by the WSBA Board of Governors as, he suggests, is required by RLD 7.3(c). This contention is without merit. Although a previous version of RLD 7.3(c) required the WSBA to obtain authorization by the Board of Governors, the rule was amended in 1997 to require authorization of a petition only by the chief disciplinary counsel of the WSBA. [4] In short, authorization of the petition by the chief disciplinary counsel of the WSBA was fully compliant with RLD 7.3(c).