Opinion
NUMBER 13-16-00332-CV
07-14-2016
MARK A. CANTU, III, Appellant, v. COMMISSION FOR LAWYER DISCIPLINE, Appellee.
On appeal from the 398th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.
ORDER
Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Perkes
OrderPer Curiam
On June 22, 2016, appellant Mark A. Cantu III ("Cantu") filed a notice of appeal in this cause related to a judgment of disbarment rendered against him. On July 7, 2016, Cantu filed an Emergency Motion for Stay of Trial Court Judgment, alleging inter alia that "a substantial likelihood exists that such judgment will be reversed" and that during the pendency of this appeal, he will suffer harm for failure "to earn a living" as a result of his disbarment. Appellee, the Commission for Lawyer Discipline, filed a response to Cantu's motion for emergency relief on July 12, 2016.
"A district court judgment of disbarment . . . from the practice of law cannot be superseded or stayed." TEX. R. DISCIPLINARY P. 3.14. We treat disciplinary rules with the same authority as statutes. See O'Quinn v. State Bar of Tex., 763 S.W.2d 397, 399 (Tex. 1988). In his motion, Cantu argues exactly for the type of relief that Rule 3.14 expressly and unambiguously prohibits. Therefore, the Court, having examined and fully considered the motion for emergency relief and response, is of the opinion that the motion should be denied. The motion for emergency relief is DENIED.
It is so ORDERED.
PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the 14th day of July, 2016.