In Re Application for Discipline of Braggans

Supreme Court of Minnesota

In Re Application for Discipline of Braggans

201 N.W.2d 259, 294 Minn. 246, 1972 Minn. LEXIS 1395

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedJuly 28, 1972

DocketNo. 43512

StatusPublished

This text of 201 N.W.2d 259 (In Re Application for Discipline of Braggans) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Re Application for Discipline of Braggans, 201 N.W.2d 259, 294 Minn. 246, 1972 Minn. LEXIS 1395 (Mich. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This matter is before the court upon the petition of the administrative director on professional conduct, filed at the direction of the State Board of Professional Responsibility, for the discipline of Harold M. Braggans, an attorney at law of the State of Minnesota. This matter was submitted upon a stipulation waiving the appointment of a referee, the filing of briefs, and oral argument together with an answer by respondent which substantially admits the allegation of the petition.

It is admitted that respondent, Harold M. Braggans, has been and is guilty of misconduct in that he consistently neglected legal matters entrusted to him in violation of the Code of Professional Conduct of the American Bar Association.

We are limiting our action at this time to a severe censure of the dilatory manner in which respondent handled the matters entrusted to him. We have so limited our action because there is no showing that his negligence caused any financial loss to any [247]*247client. In this censure of his failure to complete with reasonable promptness legal matters he has undertaken, we wish it to be understood that in no way do we condone his dilatory practices. A repetition of such practices by him in the future will not be permitted.

Mr. Chief Justice Knutson and Mr. Justice Rogosheske took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

This matter is before the court upon the petition of the administrative director on professional conduct, filed at the direction of the State Board of Professional Responsibility, for the discipline of Harold M. Braggans, an attorney at law of the State of Minnesota. This matter was submitted upon a stipulation waiving the appointment of a referee, the filing of briefs, and oral argument together with an answer by respondent which substantially admits the allegation of the petition.

It is admitted that respondent, Harold M. Braggans, has been and is guilty of misconduct in that he consistently neglected legal matters entrusted to him in violation of the Code of Professional Conduct of the American Bar Association.

We are limiting our action at this time to a severe censure of the dilatory manner in which respondent handled the matters entrusted to him. We have so limited our action because there is no showing that his negligence caused any financial loss to any [247]*247client. In this censure of his failure to complete with reasonable promptness legal matters he has undertaken, we wish it to be understood that in no way do we condone his dilatory practices. A repetition of such practices by him in the future will not be permitted.

Mr. Chief Justice Knutson and Mr. Justice Rogosheske took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

201 N.W.2d 259, 294 Minn. 246, 1972 Minn. LEXIS 1395, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-application-for-discipline-of-braggans-minn-1972.