Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite In Re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Peterson, 456 N.W.2d 89.

28 citing documents.

In re Trombley 916 N.W.2d 362 Minn. 2018
In re Trombley 916 N.W.2d 362 Minn. 2018
We have disbarred attorneys who have engaged in dishonesty to acquire another's funds, see In re Peterson , , 91-93 (Minn. 1990), because an attorney's dishonesty regarding finances is a serious concern.
In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST David A. OVERBOE, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 83318 867 N.W.2d 482 Minn. 2015
In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST David A. OVERBOE, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 83318 867 N.W.2d 482 Minn. 2015
(disbarring attorney who, among other things, misappropriated funds from a ward); (disbarring attorney who, among other things, took “advantage of a trusting, vulnerable client to put $100,000” in the attorney’s business venture); (stating that when an attorney “exhibits callous disregard for the .
In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Larry S. SEVERSON, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 99363 860 N.W.2d 658 Minn. 2015
In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Larry S. SEVERSON, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 99363 860 N.W.2d 658 Minn. 2015
(concluding that the record supported the referee’s finding that an unsecured loan from a client was not fair and reasonable).
In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Paul Arthur MOE, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 264477 851 N.W.2d 868 Minn. 2014
In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Paul Arthur MOE, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 264477 851 N.W.2d 868 Minn. 2014
See, (disbarring attorney who had a conflict of interest by entering into business transaction with a vulnerable client, made false statements to third parties, and forged documents).
In Re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Ryerson 760 N.W.2d 893 Minn. 2009
In Re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Ryerson 760 N.W.2d 893 Minn. 2009
As was the case in Swensen , the totality of Ryerson’s misconduct is similar to that of the attorney in where we disbarred an attorney who “induced his client, a 20-year-old who had sustained serious head injuries, to lend $100,000 to the attorney’s real estate company.” Swensen, d at 248 (referring to Peterson, d at 90-91, 93 ).
In Re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Czarnik 759 N.W.2d 217 Minn. 2009
In Re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Czarnik 759 N.W.2d 217 Minn. 2009
We stated in d at 370 , and that false representations made with an intent to deceive violate Rule 8.4(c).
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Swensen 743 N.W.2d 243 Minn. 2008
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Swensen 743 N.W.2d 243 Minn. 2008
Viewed in its totality, respondents misconduct is similar to that of the attorney in
In Re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Wyant 533 N.W.2d 397 Minn. 1995
In Re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Wyant 533 N.W.2d 397 Minn. 1995
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Swerine 513 N.W.2d 463 Minn. 1994
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Swerine 513 N.W.2d 463 Minn. 1994
See, (vulnerable elderly person); (trusting vulnerable client); (attorney has heavy burden to persuade court of fitness to practice law where he exhibits callous disregard for physical and financial wellbeing of vulnerable, dependent persons).
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Keate 488 N.W.2d 229 Minn. 1992
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Keate 488 N.W.2d 229 Minn. 1992
Although the referee’s recommendation is entitled to great deference, the “final responsibility for determining the appropriate discipline rests solely with this court.”
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Strid 487 N.W.2d 891 Minn. 1992
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Strid 487 N.W.2d 891 Minn. 1992
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Stroble 487 N.W.2d 869 Minn. 1992
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Stroble 487 N.W.2d 869 Minn. 1992
This court has said that attorney misconduct that “exhibits callous disregard for the physical and financial well-being of vulnerable, dependent persons” is a very serious offense and the offending attorney has a “heavy burden to persuade the court of his fitness to continue the practice of law.” ().
In RE DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST McGRATH 462 N.W.2d 599 Minn. 1990
In RE DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST McGRATH 462 N.W.2d 599 Minn. 1990
3 “While the referee’s recommendation is entitled to great weight * * * final responsibility for determining the appropriate discipline rests solely with this court.” ().
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Larsen 459 N.W.2d 115 Minn. 1990
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Larsen 459 N.W.2d 115 Minn. 1990
Rule 14(e), Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility