Background
Wyoming suspended Kenton C. Cobb from practicing law for three months beginning April 8, 2026. The discipline rested on violations of Wyoming’s professional-conduct rules concerning competence, diligence, client communication, and conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
Cobb, who was admitted to practice in North Dakota in 2023, received notice that identical discipline could be imposed there. He did not identify a reason under North Dakota Rule for Lawyer Discipline 4.4(D) to reject reciprocal discipline and instead stipulated that clear and convincing evidence supported Wyoming’s findings, that his conduct also violated North Dakota’s rules, and that a three-month suspension was appropriate.
The Court’s Holding
The North Dakota Supreme Court adopted the disciplinary findings, conclusions, and recommendation and suspended Cobb from practicing law in North Dakota for three months, effective upon entry of judgment.
The court also ordered Cobb to comply with the notice requirements of North Dakota Rule for Lawyer Discipline 6.3. Any reinstatement is governed by Rule 4.5(B).
Key Takeaways
- North Dakota imposed the same three-month suspension that Wyoming had imposed.
- Cobb stipulated that clear and convincing evidence supported the underlying rule violations and agreed to reciprocal discipline.
- The suspension begins upon entry of judgment, and Cobb must satisfy the applicable notice and reinstatement rules.
Why It Matters
The order illustrates how discipline imposed in another jurisdiction can produce corresponding discipline in North Dakota when the attorney does not establish a recognized reason to withhold it. An attorney’s stipulation to the underlying violations and proposed sanction can permit the court to resolve the reciprocal proceeding on the disciplinary record.