Kristin D. Wilkinson v. Commission for Lawyer Discipline of the State Bar of Texas

Does the standard for assessing the protection of Due Process Clause rights of lawyers in disciplinary proceedings announced in In re Ruffalo, fail to protect the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment right to due process when the attorney is not given a meaningful opportunity to present evidence in her defense, such as when states have statutes protecting the confidentiality of lawyers' clients when those clients are not the complainant, and where a lawyer, a professionally trained individual who has invested substantial financial resources in their professional careers are at risk of losing substantial property rights and their reputations, is the subject of a disciplinary action filed by a third-party non-client and the evidence necessary to defend themselves is protected by statutory confidentiality requirements and not waived, and disciplinary boards and courts can deny relief from those statutes and subject the lawyer to trial knowing the evidence is confidential and unavailable - and still use broad form jury questions without proper instructions - to produce an outcome of disbarment?