LPC wrote:it must have found Stilley guilty of something
Thirty-two things, to be exact. Here's the AP story, which doesn't say a lot more than that.
jkeeb wrote:With that picture and history shouldn't he be called Oscar Silly?
Demosthenes wrote:50 cents a page seemed extreme. I'm trying a different approach.
wserra wrote:The disciplinary committee has introduced new charges in the proceedings against Stilley's license, based on the conduct charged in the pending indictment concerning using escrow money for personal purposes.
Arkansas Supreme Court wrote:This argument reflects a fundamental misunderstanding on Stilley’s part about the nature of evidence.
Finally, while Stilley may disagree about whether the exhibits admitted by Ligon
constitute sufficient evidence to support the special judge’s specific findings, he has not
engaged in any meaningful analysis on this issue. In other disbarment cases, we have refused
to engage in a comprehensive review of the findings of fact where the respondent failed to
specifically challenge or contest them.
However, Stilley does not raise this as an argument on appeal, and we will not address issues that are not argued.
We will not second guess the special judge with respect to his findings on the merits of these arguments because Stilley has made no argument as to why the judge was in error. It is well settled that we will not address arguments that are insufficiently developed and lack citation to authority.
We decline to address Stilley’s argument on this point because he has not presented any evidence that he was prejudiced by the Committee’s treatment of the Marschewski and Tabor Complaints.
Users browsing this forum: Common Crawl [Bot] and 0 guests