In re Appeal of the Decision of the Disciplinary Board No: 17-PDB-020

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• no showing of the materiality of the missing testimony, that due diligence was used to obtain the evidence, or the facts the witness would prove
• testimony under oath was not an “acceptable or sufficient substitute for the required affidavit” in a request to continue a trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).