Barnard v. Sutliff , 202 Utah Adv. Rep. 17 ( 1992 )

HALL, Chief Justice:

(Concurring and Dissenting).

I agree that this court has exclusive jurisdiction to hear challenges to Bar disciplinary matters. This is evident by reason of the unambiguous terms of Utah Code Ann. § 78-2-2(3)(e) and the likewise unambiguous rule-making authority afforded by article VIII, section 4 of the Utah Constitution.

I therefore do not concur in vacating the judgment of the trial court that was based on the conclusion, plainly supported by the facts, that Barnard had not made a reasonable inquiry into the law. In fact, it was not until after the court ruled that he was subject to sanctions for a violation of rule 11 that Barnard revealed the extent of his research. Even then, he failed to review and apprise the court of the content of the dispositive statutory and constitutional provisions hereinabove set forth.