TX · rules
Tex. R. Disciplinary P. 9.04
Defenses
If the Respondent files an answer, he or she shall allege, and thereafter be
required to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, to the Board of Disciplinary Appeals one or
more of the following defenses to avoid the imposition of discipline identical, t o the extent
practicable, with that directed by the judgment of the other jurisdiction:
A. That the procedure followed in the other jurisdiction on the disciplinary matter was
so lacking in notice or opportunity to be heard as to constitute a deprivation of due process.
B. That there was such an infirmity of proof establishing the misconduct in the other
jurisdiction as to give rise to the clear conviction that the Board of Disciplinary Appeals,
consistent with its duty, should not accept as final the conclusion on the evidence reached
in the other jurisdiction.
C. That the imposition by the Board of Disciplinary Appeals of discipline identical, to
the extent practicable, with that imposed by the other jurisdiction would result in grave
injustice.
D. That the misconduct established in the other jurisdiction warrants substantially
different discipline in this state.
E. That the misconduct for which the attorney was disciplined in the other jurisdiction
does not constitute Professional Misconduct in this state.
If the Board of Disciplinary Appeals determines that one or more of the foregoing defenses have
been established, it shall enter such orders as it deems necessary and appropriate.
Provenance
- Source
- txcourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-15
- Edition
- 2026-09-14
- Content hash
dd7239699c689f348cd949144ea752f809a865410cf4a0fedfe0a9785f89075e
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.