Table of Contents
Attorney Ron Durban will face a disbarment hearing Monday morning at 9 AM in Oklahoma City, but the process leading to that moment reveals a system where constitutional rights appear optional. While the Oklahoma Bar Association took 1,187 days to investigate and prepare their case against him, Durban was granted just 24 days to conduct discovery on 19 separate charges spanning 139 pages of allegations.
The disparity in preparation time tells a story that goes far beyond typical legal proceedings.
The Investigation That Took Three Years
The Bar Association's case against Durban began with a grievance filed April 20, 2020, by Dana Malone after Durban called her "a slovenly pig-looking disgusting nightmare of a human being" in social media posts related to a state ballot question. From that initial complaint to filing formal charges with the Oklahoma Supreme Court on July 21, 2023, the Bar Association had 1,187 days to interview witnesses, gather evidence, and build their case.
During this same period, Durban remained suspended from practicing law without any hearing or opportunity to confront witnesses. No testimony has been taken under oath. No depositions have been conducted. The suspension was imposed based solely on allegations, not proven facts.
Discovery Denied, Continuances Granted
When Trial Master Brian Dixon initially scheduled the hearing for November 27, 2023, he gave Durban 82 days for discovery. Even this compressed timeline would have been challenging for a case involving 11 counts across 69 pages, but it never materialized.
On October 24, 2023, just 30 days before trial, the Bar Association requested a continuance to add more charges. Dixon granted the request the next day without allowing Durban to respond, despite Oklahoma rules requiring 15 days plus three for mailing to respond to motions.
The pattern repeated itself. Each time the Bar Association requested more time to amend their complaint and add charges, Dixon immediately granted the request. Each time Durban requested basic discovery rights guaranteed under the tribunal's own rules, he was denied.
The Rules That Don't Apply
The Oklahoma disciplinary rules explicitly state that discovery shall proceed "in the same manner as in civil cases." In civil cases, parties have 30 days to respond to discovery requests. Standard discovery timelines run 120 days or more, not the 24 days Durban ultimately received for his final witness list.
When Durban requested 120 days for discovery to properly defend against 19 charges, he was denied. The Bar Association's response argued he should have been conducting discovery during periods when they were amending their complaint, directly contradicting their own previous argument that cases shouldn't be handled "piecemeal."
Dixon also quashed all of Durban's subpoenas, effectively eliminating his ability to obtain documents from potential witnesses. Meanwhile, the Bar Association was granted permission to call witnesses by telephone, preventing Durban from confronting them face-to-face.
A Federal Response 200 Pages in the Making
Rather than accept what he calls "a predetermined outcome," Durban has spent weeks preparing a federal lawsuit that currently spans 153 pages without exhibits. The complaint names not just the Bar Association and its officials, but judges, prosecutors, city officials, and others involved in what he characterizes as a coordinated violation of his constitutional rights.
The lawsuit seeks to disband the Oklahoma Bar Association entirely, arguing that its existence violates members' First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Durban points to successful challenges in other states where federal courts have found mandatory bar associations problematic when they engage in political activities using members' mandatory fees.
The federal complaint also challenges Oklahoma's protective order statutes, which allowed a judge to strip Durban of his Second Amendment rights for six months without any hearing, simply for filming the judge in public.
The Hearing That Settles Nothing
Monday's hearing will proceed despite the discovery denials and procedural irregularities. Dixon has banned audio and video recording except for the court reporter, ensuring the public cannot witness the proceedings in this public hearing.
The same Highway Patrol officer who will testify against Durban about an incident at the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics has been serving as security for the Bar Association at their own hearings. The apparent conflict of interest in having a witness provide security for the entity evaluating his credibility seems to concern no one in authority.
What promises to emerge from Monday's hearing is not resolution, but escalation to federal court where questions of due process and constitutional rights may finally receive the attention they deserve.
Watch the full livestream to see the complete breakdown of the 1,187 vs 24 day timeline and learn which specific judges and officials are named in the federal lawsuit.
