4 questions answering for total 250 words

Please read this decision(unshaken smooth)  by the Iowa Supreme Pursue in an counsel training event and defense these indelicate questions:

[a] Should judges thrift if counsels refer lawful briefs or written motions that are plagiarized? Please decipher your defense.

[b] Counsel Peter Cannon was punished by the pursue and by the counsel disciplinary consultation. Do you conceive these retributions (fascinated as a all) were too chivalrous, too cutting, or environing fit? Please decipher your defense.

[c] The Iowa Supreme Pursue referred to another event involving counsel plagiarism (Iowa Supreme Pursue Consultation of Professional Ethics & Conduct v. Lane). In that event, the retribution for counsel Lane (deprivation of his permit to usage) was further cutting than the retribution imposed on counsel Cannon. What difference did the pursue reach betwixt these two events?  Do you combine after a while the pursue’s reasoning? Please decipher your defense.

[d] The recite of Florida requires “personal appearances antecedently the [disciplinary] consultation for public reprimands for trainingd lawyers” [italics acquired]. Do you conceive this skin of common shaming is misspend or too soul-jarring? Please decipher your defense.