Legal Opinion
In re Disciplinary Action Against Coleman
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided January 26, 2011No. A09-1656PublishedCited by 77 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility filed a petition for disciplinary action. The petition alleged that respondent Richard J. Coleman violated the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct when he failed to act with reasonable diligence (Rule 1.3) and com*300municate with his clients (Rule 1.4), had a conflict of interest in representing codefen-dants in a criminal matter (Rule 1.7), knowingly failed to comply with applicable law regarding termination of representation (Rules 1.16 and 3.4) and to protect his client’s interests (Rule 1.16(d)), and engaged in…
3Cases cited22 opinions
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Fabio v. BellomoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
- In Re Disciplinary Action Against NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
- In Re the Disbarment of GillardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
- Gjovik v. StropeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by77 opinions
- In re Disciplinary Action Against UlanowskiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
- In re Disciplinary Action Against FairbairnSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
- In re Disciplinary Action Against NathansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
- 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
72 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.