In Re Disciplinary Action Against Lochow
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Per curiam
This case comes before us after the director of the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board filed a petition for disciplinary proceedings against respondent. The parties stipulated to the facts and the rules of professional responsibility that were violated by respondent. They also stipulated that disciplinary sanctions were appropriate, but disagreed on the proper sanction. The matter was thus referred to a referee who, after a hearing, made findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations. These recommendations were that respondent be suspended for 18 months, pay $750 in costs…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Matter of Discipline of SchmidtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- In Re the Discipline of SerstockSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- Matter of Discipline of FlingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- In Re Disciplinary Action Against GettySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
- Matter of Discipline of SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- In Re Disciplinary Action Against NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
- Iowa Supreme Court Board of Professional Ethics & Conduct v. AplandSupreme Court of Iowa · 1998
- In Re Disciplinary Action Against AlbrechtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- In Re Disciplinary Action Against BrooksSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2005
- McQueen, Rains & Tresch, LLP v. CITGO Petroleum Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2008
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.