Legal Opinion

In re Disciplinary Action Against Austin

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 6, 1983No. C1-82-948PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

Pursuant to a hearing on a petition for disciplinary action, the referee appointed by this court, Judge Elmer J. Tomfohr, recommended disbarment of the respondent attorney. We adopt the recommendation.

Respondent Curtis E. Austin, age 57, has been a duly licensed attorney in this state since 1960. Since about 1976 he has been a sole practitioner with offices in Blooming-ton. In May 1982, the beneficiary of an estate that Austin was probating complained to the Lawyers Board of Professional Responsibility. An investigation ensued, followed by a panel hearing in July, which resulted in a petition…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. In Re Application for Discipline of HansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
  2. In Re the Discipline of ShawSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  3. Matter of Discipline of OkermanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  4. In Re the Disbarment of WackerbarthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  5. In Re the Discipline of PrimusSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Matter of Discipline of KottsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
  2. Matter of AustinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API