Home/Supreme Court of Minnesota/In Re Disbarment of Earle B. Dows

In Re Disbarment of Earle B. Dows

209 N.W. 627, 168 Minn. 6, 47 A.L.R. 265, 1926 Minn. LEXIS 1495
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedJune 11, 1926
DocketNo. 25,549.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 209 N.W. 627 (In Re Disbarment of Earle B. Dows) 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 Earle B. Dows, 209 N.W. 627, 168 Minn. 6, 47 A.L.R. 265, 1926 Minn. LEXIS 1495 (Mich. 1926).

Opinion

*7 Pee Curiam.

Proceedings by the State Board of Law Examiners for the removal of Earle B. Dows, a member of the bar, for misconduct. Testimony was taken by a referee and a hearing thereon had before this court.

The respondent was admitted to the bar of this state on January 14, 1926, without examination, upon credentials from a sister state showing him possessed of proper qualifications and of good standing. He commenced practice in Minneapolis as attorney for the Minneapolis Credit Service Exchange, Inc. It was his practice to send to a delinquent debtor, over his actual or authorized signature, a notice, at the top of which was printed in large black type: “Advance and final notice before suit for garnishment, levy and sale.” The creditor was named plaintiff and the debtor defendant. At the left of his signature was a red seal with his name impressed thereon. The debtor was told the amount of the debt, that payment had been demanded and refused, and that unless he remitted suit would be instituted for the amount with interest, costs and disbursements. The paper was about 13 inches in length and 8 inches in width, and when folded bore as an indorsement the title of a case as in court. The purpose is evident. It was to simulate legal process. Its purpose was not merely to call the debtor’s attention to a debt due or merely to .threaten him, but to give force to the paper by its form and formality, by giving the impression that it was a legal document of importance and something in the way of a proceeding in court. It is evident upon inspection. We will not state its contents further. The reporter will reproduce the notice appended to the proceeding, as nearly as conveniently may be, in reduced but proportionate size, using fictitious names for the plaintiff and defendant.

*8

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

Related

People v. Globe Jewelers, Inc.
249 A.D. 122 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
209 N.W. 627, 168 Minn. 6, 47 A.L.R. 265, 1926 Minn. LEXIS 1495, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-disbarment-of-earle-b-dows-minn-1926.