Legal Opinion
In Re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Otis
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided August 13, 1998No. C4-96-1604PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
On June 2, 1992, the New Hampshire Supreme Court disbarred respondent James D. Otis from the practice of law due to his improper sexual behavior toward 6 of his *562female clients. In 1996, the Director of the Minnesota Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility first learned of Otis’s disbarment and filed a petition for reciprocal discipline. Otis admits to the misconduct that led to his New Hampshire disbarment, but he claims that his misconduct was caused by a seizure disorder that has since been controlled through medication and, therefore, requests that this court not disbar him.…
3Cases cited5 opinions
- Matter of Disciplinary Act. Against WeyhrichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Bourdon's CaseSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1989
- In Re Disciplinary Action Against KossSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- In re Application for Discipline of HeinzeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
- In re the Disciplinary Action against KimmelSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
4Cited by9 opinions
- In Re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against PerezSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Larry S. SEVERSON, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 99363Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
- In Re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against MeadenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Gregory Gerard McPHEE, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 316696Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
- In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Larry S. SEVERSON, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 99363Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.