Texas Supreme Court
Lane v. Commission for Lawyer Discipline
No. 23-0956 June 6, 2025
Issue:
Does the four-year limitations period in the Rules of Disciplinary Procedure apply to reciprocal-discipline proceedings?
Holding:
Yes. In 2017, the plaintiff sent emails to a federal magistrate judge in Illinois criticizing the judge’s rulings. Following the plaintiff’s 2023 suspension of her law license by the Illinois Supreme Court, Texas’s Commission for Lawyer Discipline sought an identical suspension in Texas. The Texas Supreme Court reversed and dismissed the Texas disciplinary proceeding, finding that the limitations rule applies to reciprocal-discipline proceedings. Read opinion.
Dissent (Boyd, J., joined by Busby, J.):
The dissent would hold that Tex. R. Disc. P. 9.04 “makes clear that an attorney who fails to allege and prove at least one of the listed defenses cannot avoid reciprocal discipline. … Because Rule 9.04’s list of defenses does not include limitations under Rule 17.06, limitations under Rule 17.06 is not a defense an attorney can raise ‘to avoid the imposition’ of reciprocal discipline.” Read dissent.
Dissent (Busby, J.):
The dissent would conclude that the reciprocal-discipline proceeding in Texas should be considered timely because professional misconduct for purposes of reciprocal discipline occurs when the attorney has been disciplined in another jurisdiction. Read dissent.
Commentary:
This case does not involve the typical disciplinary action because it deals with reciprocal discipline—in which Texas imposes its own sanctions upon an attorney based upon a grievance and discipline arising out of another state. As contrasted with the typical disciplinary procedure, reciprocal discipline is not investigated and is in fact governed by a completely different part of the rules governing disciplinary procedure. This case is rendered even more unusual in that the disciplined attorney is the individual who self-reported the out-of-state discipline to the State Bar—which she is required to do by the rules. This opinion viewed the attorney’s self-reporting email to the Texas State Bar as the “grievance” that would normally begin the investigation into the matter, except that this is a case of reciprocal discipline, in which an investigation is not conducted in Texas. The disciplined attorney did not delay in reporting the out-of-state discipline, as she sent the email one month after the out-of-state discipline was imposed. As such, it seems that the Texas disciplinary authorities were prevented from pursuing this matter because the other state took a significant amount of time in rendering its decision. Perhaps—in order to avoid this problem—Texas disciplinary authorities could start combing through grievances filed in other states to see if any Texas attorneys are involved. But until the other state actually got around to imposing its discipline, reciprocal discipline could not be imposed. Then—as it was in this case—it might be too late.
Texas Court of Appeals
State v. 5 Gambling Machines
No. 06-24-00011-CV 4/30/25
Issue:
Were five video consoles (and cash proceeds from the devices) appropriately seized from a convenience store as gambling devices under Penal Code §47.01(4)?
Holding:
No. The Court upheld the trial judge’s ruling that the evidence showed the “Follow Me” game on the consoles offers something of value (namely, 105 percent of the consideration paid to play) but is determined by skill rather than by chance. Therefore, the consoles could not be considered gambling devices under §47.01, and the cash proceeds seized were not gambling proceeds if the seized devices are not gambling devices. Read opinion.
Commentary:
In this case, the trial judge made findings that the machine’s game was won by skill only. That made this gambling case difficult to win on appeal. The appeals court seemed to suggest that the State could have made a more thorough challenge in this State’s appeal. But the trial court’s findings made it very difficult for the State to prevail.
Register now for a summit on mental health and justice collaboration August 14-15
This inaugural forensic and jail diversion event will bring together mental health professionals, justice system partners, and community stakeholders from across Texas for a two-day event focused on bridging gaps and bringing community and government systems together at the intersection of mental health and the justice system.
Click HERE to be redirected to the Summit’s website.