24 P.2d 317 | Nev. | 1933
Lead Opinion
In due time a transcript of the proceedings was filed in this court, after which the defendant filed his petition for a review and for a reversal of the order of suspension.
It is the duty of the court to examine the entire record anew. In re Scott,
No legal questions are involved in this matter. The only question for determination is whether the defendant committed the acts charged and with the intent averred.
We are frank to say that, if the matter were before us as an original trial tribunal, we seriously doubt if the facts proven in the case of Hohman v. Hohman would induce us to reach the same conclusion as that reached by the two bodies which have passed upon that matter, but we do not find it necessary to critically examine the evidence as to it.
We have carefully considered the evidence introduced relative to the alleged misconduct in the case of Griffing v. Griffing, and are of the opinion that no other conclusion could have been properly reached than that finding the defendant guilty of the act charged. We do not think it necessary to review the evidence, since such a review would be of no assistance in any future case which might arise.
The order of the board of governors is affirmed.
Addendum
Rehearing denied.
It is further ordered that the defendant, A. Grant Miller, be and he is hereby suspended from the practice of law in the State of Nevada for the period of six months from the date hereof. *40