In Re Disbarment of Arthur E. Olson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

In Re Disbarment of Arthur E. Olson

267 N.W. 361, 197 Minn. 409, 1936 Minn. LEXIS 867

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedMay 29, 1936

DocketNo. 30,238.

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 267 N.W. 361 (In Re Disbarment of Arthur E. Olson) 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 Disbarment of Arthur E. Olson, 267 N.W. 361, 197 Minn. 409, 1936 Minn. LEXIS 867 (Mich. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

*410 Per Curiam.

This proceeding ivas instituted by the board of law examiners for the disbarment or discipline of Arthur E. Olson, an attorney at law in this state. The matter ivas referred to the Honorable Kenneth G. Brill, one of the judges of the second judicial district, as referee, to take evidence, making findings of fact, and report the same to this court.

The findings of fact establish that respondent was on December 22, 1934, convicted of the crime of forgery in the first degree in the district court of Hennepin county; that thereafter respondent took an appeal to this court from the order denying his motion for a new trial; and that on November 22, 1935, this court affirmed said order of the district court. State v. Olson, 195 Minn. 493, 263 N. W. 437. Despondent was thereafter, pursuant to the sentence of the district court, committed to the state prison at Stillwater, Minnesota, where he is now confined.

1 Mason Minn. St. 1927, § 5697, provides that this court may remove or suspend an attorney,. “(A) Upon his being convicted of felony, or of a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude; in either of which cases the record of conviction shall be conclusive evidence.” In re Disbarment of MacLean, 196 Minn. 5, 263 N. W. 906.

It is therefore ordered that Arthur E. Olson, respondent, having-been convicted of a forgery, be disbarred and that his name be stricken from the roll of attorneys in this state.

Let judgment be entered accordingly.

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

*410 Per Curiam.

This proceeding ivas instituted by the board of law examiners for the disbarment or discipline of Arthur E. Olson, an attorney at law in this state. The matter ivas referred to the Honorable Kenneth G. Brill, one of the judges of the second judicial district, as referee, to take evidence, making findings of fact, and report the same to this court.

The findings of fact establish that respondent was on December 22, 1934, convicted of the crime of forgery in the first degree in the district court of Hennepin county; that thereafter respondent took an appeal to this court from the order denying his motion for a new trial; and that on November 22, 1935, this court affirmed said order of the district court. State v. Olson, 195 Minn. 493, 263 N. W. 437. Despondent was thereafter, pursuant to the sentence of the district court, committed to the state prison at Stillwater, Minnesota, where he is now confined.

1 Mason Minn. St. 1927, § 5697, provides that this court may remove or suspend an attorney,. “(A) Upon his being convicted of felony, or of a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude; in either of which cases the record of conviction shall be conclusive evidence.” In re Disbarment of MacLean, 196 Minn. 5, 263 N. W. 906.

It is therefore ordered that Arthur E. Olson, respondent, having-been convicted of a forgery, be disbarred and that his name be stricken from the roll of attorneys in this state.

Let judgment be entered accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 N.W. 361, 197 Minn. 409, 1936 Minn. LEXIS 867, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-disbarment-of-arthur-e-olson-minn-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack