Legal Opinion
In re Reinstatement of Stockman
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided June 21, 2017No. A15-0689PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
Petitioner Louis Andrew Stockman seeks reinstatement to the practice of law under Rule 18, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR). Stockman has been the subject of two prior public disciplinary actions, both resulting in suspension. A panel of the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board recommended against reinstatement, finding that Stock-man had “not proven by clear and convincing evidence that he has undergone a moral change.” The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility (Director) agrees with the recommendation of *855the panel. Stockman challenges…
3Cases cited19 opinions
- Gjovik v. StropeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- In Re Disciplinary Action Against LyonsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- Matter of Reinstatement of WegnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- In Re Reinstatement to the Practice of Law of KadrieSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
- In Re Discipline of SwansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by13 opinions
- In re SeversonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2019
- In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Joseph Kaminsky, a Minnesota Attorney, A21-1649, Supreme Court, January ...Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2024
- In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Joseph Kaminsky, a Minnesota Attorney, A21-1649, Supreme Court, January ...Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2024
- In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Joseph Kaminsky, a Minnesota Attorney, A21-1649, Supreme Court, January ...Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2024
- In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Joseph Kaminsky, a Minnesota Attorney, A21-1649, Supreme Court, January ...Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2024
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.