Court Opinion

ID: 9663165
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 23:30:12.190768+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:46.182128
License: Public Domain

SCOTT, Justice
(dissenting).
I cannot agree that it is necessary to take the unprecedented action of withdrawing our opinion filed August 1, 1986. The respondent is now suspended by that decision. The text clearly states that he can be reinstated only if certain terms and conditions are met, among them that:
Respondent shall pay a reasonable sum toward reimbursement of the Director’s expenses, costs, and disbursements in this proceeding. Within 15 days from the date of this opinion, the parties shall submit to this court the sum agreed upon and the terms of payment. If they are unable to agree, within the same 15 days each party shall submit in affidavit form their position on this issue for the court’s decision.
It was therefore contemplated that we might be called upon to set the amount. There seems no reason why we cannot take such action at this time.
The only other reason for withdrawing our opinion would be to impose a greater sanction. We stated in the opinion that:
We are persuaded there will be no reoc-curence of this misconduct by respondent. His otherwise good record over many years and his contriteness so vouch. Taking all these factors into consideration and having in mind respondent’s age, together with the other conditions we here impose, we believe a 1-year suspension is appropriate.
As the opinion indicates, this matter has been thoroughly aired. We should not have second thoughts merely because we have the power to impose a greater sanction. We should only take a more severe stance if justice calls for it. The opinion properly evaluates the complicated procedure involved and arrives at a properly balanced conclusion. I would not withdraw it, and therefore dissent.