Case No. 2:19-cv-00053-MMD
This is an attorney discipline matter. Before the Court is Scott M. Holper's supplement to his renewed petition for reinstatement. (ECF No. 13.) As further explained below, the Court will grant Mr. Holper's renewed petition for reinstatement.
Mr. Holper was suspended by the Nevada Supreme Court ("NSC") under an order of Suspension filed October 23, 2017, following his conditional guilty plea to charges that most significantly included "failing to safekeep client property, failing to communicate with and diligently and competently represent his clients, and his lack of candor toward the court." (ECF No. 1 at 1, 8.) This Court issued an order to show cause as to why he should not be suspended from practice in this Court on November 6, 2017. (Id.) Mr. Holper never responded to that order. The Court therefore suspended Mr. Holper from practice on February 16, 2018. (ECF No. 4.)
Mr. Holper petitioned this Court for reinstatement on January 7, 2019. (ECF No. 5.) Then-Chief-Judge Navarro denied his petition for reinstatement without prejudice because Mr. Holper was still subject to conditions imposed by the NSC, and this Court is unable to monitor his compliance with those conditions. (ECF No. 7 at 2.) That order concluded, "[u]pon successfully satisfying each of the conditions ordered by the Nevada Supreme Court, Holper may file a renewed petition for reinstatement, which must include proof that he has complied with all ordered conditions and is a member of the Nevada State Bar in good standing." (Id.)
Mr. Holper filed his renewed petition for reinstatement on February 28, 2019. (ECF No. 8.) The Court granted Mr. Holper leave to supplement his petition on September 19, 2019, because he could not yet show he had successfully discharged the probationary conditions the NSC imposed on him, but was close to being able to show he had discharged them. (ECF No. 10.) Mr. Holper timely filed his supplement on November 12, 2019. (ECF No. 13.)
Local Rule IA 11-7(i) states that an attorney who is the subject of an order of suspension "may petition for reinstatement to practice before this court or for modification of the order as may be supported by good cause and the interests of justice." LR IA 11-7(i). The Rule further provides: "if the attorney was readmitted by the supervising court or the discipline imposed by the supervising court was modified or satisfied, the petition must explain the situation with specificity, including a description of any restrictions or conditions imposed on readmission by the supervising court." Id. However, the decision as to whether and under what circumstances the attorney will be reinstated is left to the discretion of the Chief Judge, or other reviewing Judge if the Chief Judge refers the matter to another judge. See id.
The Court will grant Mr. Holper's renewed petition for reinstatement because he has now complied with the Court's prior orders (ECF Nos. 7, 10), demonstrating that he has successfully discharged the probationary conditions the NSC imposed on him (ECF No. 13 at 2, 4), and produced a certificate of good standing from the NSC (Id. at 5). The Court therefore finds that Mr. Holper's renewed petition for reinstatement is "supported by good cause and the interests of justice." LR IA 11-7(i). /// /// ///
It is therefore ordered that Scott M. Holper's renewed petition for reinstatement (ECF Nos. 8, 13) is granted.
DATED THIS 27th day of November 2019.
MIRANDA M. DU
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE