Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite In Re Disciplinary Action Against Redburn, 746 N.W.2d 330.

28 citing documents.

Original Jurisdiction Per Curiam Minn. 2022
In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Ignatius Chukwuemeka Udeani, Minn. 2020
See, e.g. , In re Redburn , Rhodes
In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Mpatanishi Syanaloli TAYARI-GARRETT, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 342075 866 N.W.2d 513 Minn. 2015
In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Mpatanishi Syanaloli TAYARI-GARRETT, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 342075 866 N.W.2d 513 Minn. 2015
Finally, we consider similar cases to ensure that the discipline imposed is consistent with previous sanctions for similar conduct, Nathanson, d at 80, although we impose discipline based on the facts and circumstances of each case
In re Disciplinary Action Against Harrigan 841 N.W.2d 624 Minn. 2014
In re Disciplinary Action Against Harrigan 841 N.W.2d 624 Minn. 2014
In addition, Harrigan’s failure to respond to his clients’ attempts to contact him about their distributions caused harm to the public and legal profession because it “reflect[ed] adversely on the bar, and [was] destructive of public confidence in the legal profession.” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
In re Disciplinary Action Against Ulanowski 834 N.W.2d 697 Minn. 2013
In re Disciplinary Action Against Ulanowski 834 N.W.2d 697 Minn. 2013
In addition, Ulanowski’s failure to respond to S.M.K.’s numerous attempts to contact him was “intensely frustrating to [S.M.K.], reflects adversely on the bar, and [was] destructive of public confidence in the legal profession.” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
In re Disciplinary Action Against O'Brien 809 N.W.2d 463 Minn. 2012
In re Disciplinary Action Against O'Brien 809 N.W.2d 463 Minn. 2012
(citations omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
In re Disciplinary Action Against Swokowski 796 N.W.2d 317 Minn. 2011
In re Disciplinary Action Against Swokowski 796 N.W.2d 317 Minn. 2011
(“Redburn violated Rule 3.4(c) because the August 2005 suspension order specifically required him to comply with the requirements of Rule 26, RLPR.”).
In re Disciplinary Action Against Coleman 793 N.W.2d 296 Minn. 2011
In re Disciplinary Action Against Coleman 793 N.W.2d 296 Minn. 2011
825 n. 3 (Minn.2010) (concluding that *304 the referee’s findings were not sufficient to establish that the attorney had committed a criminal act); , 61 n. 8 (Minn.2009) (concluding that the referee’s conclusion of law that the attorney had committed a criminal act was not supported by the record); , 336 n. 5 (Minn.2008) (concluding that the allegations of the disciplinary petition, deemed admitted due to the attorney’s failure to answer, were insufficient to establish that the attorney violated
In re Disciplinary Action Against Fett 790 N.W.2d 840 Minn. 2010
In re Disciplinary Action Against Fett 790 N.W.2d 840 Minn. 2010
(concluding that an attorney’s failure to communicate reflects adversely on the bar and decreases public confidence in the legal system).
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Rebeau 787 N.W.2d 168 Minn. 2010
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Rebeau 787 N.W.2d 168 Minn. 2010
Although prior decisions guide and aid us in enforcing consistent discipline, we impose discipline based on the unique facts and circumstances of each case
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Aitken 787 N.W.2d 152 Minn. 2010
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Aitken 787 N.W.2d 152 Minn. 2010
Although prior decisions guide and aid us in enforcing consistent discipline, we impose discipline based on the unique facts and circumstances of each case
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Waite 782 N.W.2d 820 Minn. 2010
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Waite 782 N.W.2d 820 Minn. 2010
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Lyons 780 N.W.2d 629 Minn. 2010
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Lyons 780 N.W.2d 629 Minn. 2010
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Albrecht 779 N.W.2d 530 Minn. 2010
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Albrecht 779 N.W.2d 530 Minn. 2010
(“[Regardless of whether an attorney’s misconduct ‘jeopardize^] the client’s position with respect to a claim, a lawyer’s failure to communicate with the client and misrepresentations regarding the status of a pending case are intensely frustrating to the client, reflect adversely on the bar, and are
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Karlsen 778 N.W.2d 307 Minn. 2010
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Karlsen 778 N.W.2d 307 Minn. 2010