Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite In RE Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Jesse David MATSON, a Minnesota Attorney, …, 889 N.W.2d 17.
-
In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against, Bradley J. Haddy, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0387503. ...
Minn. 2026
(neglecting to file briefs); (order) (failing to communicate); –22 (Minn. 2017) (failing to keep client apprised of case status or provide client with important case-related documents); Taplin, d at 312 (failing to attend hearings).
- In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Ana L. Pena, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0386459 Minn. 2025
-
In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Ana L. Pena, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0386459
Minn. 2025
(concluding that we could not consider mitigating factors an attorney might have raised when the attorney never responded to a disciplinary petition).
- In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Stephen J. Baird, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0398840. ... Minn. 2025
-
In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Stephen J. Baird, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0398840. ...
Minn. 2025
26 (Minn. 2017) (disbarring an attorney for neglect and abandonment of ten clients).
- In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against James V. Bradley, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0392102. ... 7 N.W.3d 604 Minn. 2024
- In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against James V. Bradley, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0392102. ... 7 N.W.3d 604 Minn. 2024
- In re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against David L. Ludescher, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 194347. ... Minn. 2023
-
In re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against David L. Ludescher, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 194347. ...
Minn. 2023
Finally, while we consult similar cases and attempt to impose consistent discipline, the proper discipline is ultimately determined “based on the unique facts and circumstances of each case.” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
-
Original Jurisdiction
Minn. 2023
Additionally, we consult similar cases and attempt to impose consistent discipline, but the proper discipline is ultimately determined “based on the unique facts and circumstances of each case.” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
-
Original Jurisdiction Per Curiam
Minn. 2022
In re 15 Matson, (declining to consider any mitigating circumstances because the attorney did not file an answer to the petition); (“[R]espondent’s failure to answer the petition with any mitigating circumstances bars our consideration of such issues.”).
-
Original Jurisdiction Per Curiam
Minn. 2021
(declining to consider mitigating factors because the allegations have been deemed admitted.).
-
In re Petition for Disciplinary Action
Minn. 2020
But we have also acknowledged that in “a few instances [we have] imposed di scipline less than disbarment in a misappropriation case when the record does not reveal substantial mitigating factors.” d 17, 26 (Minn. 2017).
- In re Disciplinary Action Against Villanueva 931 N.W.2d 816 Minn. 2019
-
In re Disciplinary Action Against Villanueva
931 N.W.2d 816
Minn. 2019
See In re Matson , , 25 (Minn. 2017) ("Because [the attorney] did not file a response and we have deemed the allegations in the petitions admitted, he may not now raise mitigating factors.").
- In re Amoun Vang Sayaovong 909 N.W.2d 575 Minn. 2018
-
In re Amoun Vang Sayaovong
909 N.W.2d 575
Minn. 2018
See In re Matson , , 23 n.2 (Minn. 2017) (declining to apply the reciprocal-discipline standard, even when the Director requested it, because the case involved additional acts of misconduct that were not considered by the other jurisdiction).
-
Original Jurisdiction Per Curiam
Minn. 2018
(declining to consider any mitigating 7 circumstances because the attorney did not file an answer to the petition).
- In re Disciplinary Action Against Tigue 900 N.W.2d 424 Minn. 2017
-
In re Disciplinary Action Against Tigue
900 N.W.2d 424
Minn. 2017
We recently noted that in “a few instances [we have] imposed discipline less than disbarment in a misappropriation case when the record does not reveal substantial mitigating factors.” -92 (Minn. 2012) (order) (imposing an indefinite suspension for a minimum of.
- In re Disciplinary Action Against Saltzstein 896 N.W.2d 864 Minn. 2017
-
In re Disciplinary Action Against Saltzstein
896 N.W.2d 864
Minn. 2017
Misappropriation alone is ‘“particularly serious misconduct and usually warrants disbarment absent clear and convincing evidence of substantial mitigating factors.’ ” ().