299 P.3d 1050
Utah2013Background
- Rasmussen was disbarred for defying a suspension order and continuing to practice law.
- OPC filed charges alleging violations of Utah Rules of Professional Conduct 8.4(a) and (d) related to recusal motions and failing to appear.
- The district court imposed a one-year suspension with a stay and conditions, which Rasmussen violated by practicing during suspension.
- Rasmussen sought reinstatement; ambiguity existed whether RLDD 14-524 or 14-525 governed reinstatement, delaying clear procedure.
- OPC opposed reinstatement and later presented evidence Rasmussen violated the sanctions order; the court upheld disbarment after a hearing.
- The court affirmed, holding disbarment warranted under RLDD and that Rasmussen’s conduct justified harsher discipline than a stay lift.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court had authority to reconsider post-judgment reinstatement findings. | Rasmussen | OPC | Yes; court could hear post-judgment matters under Rule 60(b). |
| Whether res judicata or law of the case barred reopening of reinstatement. | Rasmussen | OPC | No; reinstatement order not final, law of the case not controlling here. |
| Whether disbarment was proper punishment for violating the suspension order. | Rasmussen | OPC | Yes; disbarment appropriate under RLDD 14-606(a) and 14-605 for deceit and ongoing misconduct. |
| Whether mitigating factors negated disbarment. | Rasmussen | OPC | No; mitigating factors were insufficient or improperly timed; self-serving motive and prior discipline supported disbarment. |
Key Cases Cited
- IHC Health Servs., Inc. v. D & K Mgmt., Inc., 196 P.3d 588 (Utah 2008) (binding effect of decisions in later proceedings; law-of-the-case considerations)
- In re Discipline of Ennenga, 37 P.3d 1150 (Utah 2001) (independent sanction policy in professional discipline)
- Kell v. State, 285 P.3d 1133 (Utah 2012) (Rule 60(b) relief under unusual or exceptional circumstances)
- Judson v. Wheeler RV Las Vegas, L.L.C., 270 P.3d 456 (Utah 2012) (burden of identifying basis for the motion; discretion in construing motions)
- Gillmor v. Wright, 850 P.2d 431 (Utah 1993) (law-of-the-case doctrine; not inexorable command)
- Workers Comp. Fund v. Argonaut Ins. Co., 266 P.3d 792 (Utah 2011) (whether a motion can be treated as Rule 60(b) despite captioning)
- Utah State Bar v. Doncouse (In re Discipline of Doncouse), 99 P.3d 837 (Utah 2004) (suspension violations as grounds for harsher discipline)