In Re Discipline of Stuhff

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that while this court grants deference to the panel's findings of fact, the automatic review of a panel's decision recommending a suspension is conducted de novo
• explaining that this court reviews a panel's findings and recommendations de novo
• providing that the \clear and convincing evidence\ needed in disciplinary matters requires \evidence of tangible facts from which a legitimate inference . . . may be drawn\ (quoting Gruber v. Baker, 20 Nev. 453, 477, 23 P. 858, 865 (1890))
• attorney served judge with copy of judicial conduct complaint; conduct was not in court and intended to disrupt tribunal
• attorney served judge with copy of judicial conduct complaint; conduct was not in court and intended to disrupt tribunal
• “To be clear and convincing, evidence need not possess such a degree of force as to 20 be irresistible, but there must be evidence of tangible facts from which a ... 21 may be drawn.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).