Legal Opinion
In re Disciplinary Action Against Nathanson
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided February 29, 2012No. A10-0684PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility (Director) filed a petition for disciplinary action alleging that respondent Stanley H. Nathanson’s conduct in numerous client matters, including his failure to act with reasonable competence and reasonable diligence, failure to obtain informed consent and communicate with his clients, pursuit of appeals that were frivolous or not meritorious, knowing disobedience of tribunal rules, and, engagement in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, violated Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.1,1 1.3,2 1.4(a)(1)3 and (3)4,…
3Cases cited17 opinions
- State v. LothenbachSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- State v. DiedeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
- In re Disciplinary Action Against ColemanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
- In Re Disciplinary Action Against NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
- In Re Disciplinary Action Against RebeauSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by40 opinions
- In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Mark Alan GREENMAN, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 228990Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
- In re Disciplinary Action Against TigueSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2017
- In re Disciplinary Action Against VossSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2013
- In re Disciplinary Action Against TaplinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2013
- In re Disciplinary Action Against MurrinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.