Legal Opinion
In re Disciplinary Action Against Paul
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided February 8, 2012No. A09-2166PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
This discipline case involving respondent attorney William D. Paul arises out of a petition and supplementary petition for disciplinary action filed by the Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility (COLPR"). A referee appointed by our court heard evidence for and against the petition and supplementary petition, concluded Paul engaged in misconduct, and recommended that Paul be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law for a minimum of six months. Paul disputes the referee's finding that he improperly notarized an affidavit. We indefinitely suspend Paul from…
3Cases cited19 opinions
- In Re Disciplinary Action Against OberhauserSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- In re Disciplinary Action Against ColemanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
- In Re Disciplinary Action Against NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
- In re Disciplinary Action Against UlanowskiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
- In Re Disciplinary Action Against BrooksSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2005
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by8 opinions
- In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Duane A. KENNEDY, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 55128Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
- In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Mpatanishi Syanaloli TAYARI-GARRETT, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 342075Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
- In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Michael John RIEHM, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0296570Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
- In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Duane A. KENNEDY, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 55128Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
- In re Disciplinary Action Against ClarkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2013
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.