Legal Opinion
In Re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Graham
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided March 23, 1990No. C3-88-1760PublishedCited by 63 opinions
1Per curiam
This matter comes before us on petition from the Director of the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board for disciplinary action against John Remington Graham, respondent. The Director charged Graham with violating Rules 3.1, 8.2(a), and 8.4(d), Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct, by making false statements regarding the integrity of a judge, a magistrate, a legal officer and a lawyer without basis in fact and with reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of the statements.
The statements accused Minnesota District Court Judge John Spellacy, United States Magistrate Patrick J.…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- St. Amant v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Garrison v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- In Re RuffaloSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. ConnaughtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by63 opinions
- Standing Committee on Discipline of the United States District Court for the Central District of California v. Stephen YagmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington v. John Jarrette SandlinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- In Re ChmuraMichigan Supreme Court · 2000
- In re HoltzmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. GardnerOhio Supreme Court · 2003
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.