In Re Disbarment of Abe S. Ginsberg
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Per curiam
It is enough to compel judgment of disbarment that the accused has been convicted of a felony — attempted grand larceny. He ap pealed from the judgment, which was affirmed here. State v. Ginsberg, 192 Minn. 241, 255 N. W. 828. In addition to the foregoing, it is not amiss to say that Mr. Ginsberg has been found guilty upon two other charges, his guilt of either of which would demonstrate-his utter unfitness to remain a member of the legal profession. This is not the first time he has been before us for discipline. He was admitted to the bar in 1911. In 1918 he was suspended from the practice…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Levings v. First National Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1934
- In re the Removal of GinsbergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918
- State v. GinsbergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1934
3Cited by1 opinion
- In Re Disbarment of Abraham H. KaratzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1938