Legal Opinion

In Re Disciplinary Action Against Prueter

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 21, 1984No. C1-82-1663PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

The Director of the Lawyer’s Professional Responsibility Board (Director) petitioned this court for disciplinary action against respondent. By order of this court, the disciplinary action was referred to a referee for findings of fact and recommendations. The respondent seeks summary affirmance of the referee’s recommendation to this court that respondent be given a private reprimand and be required to perform $5,000 of free legal services for the indigent. The referee found that respondent did not comport with Ethical Consideration 5-5 of the Minnesota Code of Professional Responsibility in…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Committee on Professional Ethics & Conduct of the Iowa State Bar Ass'n v. BehnkeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1979
  2. State v. HoranWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Blank v. KramerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
  4. Columbus Bar Ass'n v. RameyOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  5. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of JonesOregon Supreme Court · 1969

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SteinCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. LanochaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  3. Attorney Grievance Commission v. LanochaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  4. Attorney Grievance Commission v. SteinCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003

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

Powered by the Exa API