Matter of Reciprocal Discipline of Huisman

North Dakota Supreme Court

Matter of Reciprocal Discipline of Huisman

2017 ND 272, 904 N.W.2d 33

CourtNorth Dakota Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 4, 2017

Docket20170369

StatusPublished

This text of 2017 ND 272 (Matter of Reciprocal Discipline of Huisman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Matter of Reciprocal Discipline of Huisman, 2017 ND 272, 904 N.W.2d 33 (N.D. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

SUSPENSION ORDERED.

Per Curiam.

[¶ 1] On October 16, 2017, the Disciplinary Board notified the Supreme Court under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.4(D) that it was recommending the reciprocal discipline of Travis W. Huisman. The record reflects that a trial panel of the Supreme Court of Oregon suspended Huisman for 18 months for client neglect, failure to communicate, trust account violations, improper termination of representation, and noncooperation with a disciplinary proceeding.

[¶ 2] Huisman was admitted to practice law in North Dakota on June 20, 2012. Huisman did not pay his license fee for 2015. Therefore, he has not been licensed since December 31, 2014. On December 7, 2015, Huisman was suspended for two months, effective when and if he is relicensed to practice law in North Dakota. Disciplinary Board v. Huisman, 2015 ND 286, 872 N.W.2d 336.

[¶3] No current address is known for Huisman. In an affidavit filed by Disciplinary Counsel, unsuccessful efforts to locate and serve Huisman were outlined. Therefore, service was made on the Clerk of the Supreme Court under Admission to Practice R. 1. On May 10, 2017, Disciplinary Counsel served notice under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.4(B) that a certified copy of an order of discipline entered by the Oregon Bar Association was received. The notice informed Huisman he had 30 days to file any claim that imposition of the identical discipline in North Dakota would be unwarranted and the reasons for the claim. No response was received from Huisman. On October 16, 2017, the Disciplinary Board filed its recommendation that Huis-man be suspended for 18 months.

[¶ 4] The Court considered the matter, and

[¶ 5] ORDERED, that Travis W. Huis-man is SUSPENDED from the practice of law in North Dakota for 18 months, effective when and if he is relicensed to practice law in North Dakota.

[¶ 6] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that Huisman must comply with N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 6.3 regarding notice.

[¶ 7] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that reinstatement is governed by N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.5.

[¶ 8] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C. J. Lisa Fair McEvers Daniel J. Crothers Jerod E. Tufte Jon J. Jensen

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SUSPENSION ORDERED.

Per Curiam.

[¶ 1] On October 16, 2017, the Disciplinary Board notified the Supreme Court under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.4(D) that it was recommending the reciprocal discipline of Travis W. Huisman. The record reflects that a trial panel of the Supreme Court of Oregon suspended Huisman for 18 months for client neglect, failure to communicate, trust account violations, improper termination of representation, and noncooperation with a disciplinary proceeding.

[¶ 2] Huisman was admitted to practice law in North Dakota on June 20, 2012. Huisman did not pay his license fee for 2015. Therefore, he has not been licensed since December 31, 2014. On December 7, 2015, Huisman was suspended for two months, effective when and if he is relicensed to practice law in North Dakota. Disciplinary Board v. Huisman, 2015 ND 286, 872 N.W.2d 336.

[¶3] No current address is known for Huisman. In an affidavit filed by Disciplinary Counsel, unsuccessful efforts to locate and serve Huisman were outlined. Therefore, service was made on the Clerk of the Supreme Court under Admission to Practice R. 1. On May 10, 2017, Disciplinary Counsel served notice under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.4(B) that a certified copy of an order of discipline entered by the Oregon Bar Association was received. The notice informed Huisman he had 30 days to file any claim that imposition of the identical discipline in North Dakota would be unwarranted and the reasons for the claim. No response was received from Huisman. On October 16, 2017, the Disciplinary Board filed its recommendation that Huis-man be suspended for 18 months.

[¶ 4] The Court considered the matter, and

[¶ 5] ORDERED, that Travis W. Huis-man is SUSPENDED from the practice of law in North Dakota for 18 months, effective when and if he is relicensed to practice law in North Dakota.

[¶ 6] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that Huisman must comply with N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 6.3 regarding notice.

[¶ 7] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that reinstatement is governed by N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.5.

[¶ 8] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C. J. Lisa Fair McEvers Daniel J. Crothers Jerod E. Tufte Jon J. Jensen

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 ND 272, 904 N.W.2d 33, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-reciprocal-discipline-of-huisman-nd-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack