In re Disciplinary Action Against Andrew

Supreme Court of Minnesota

In re Disciplinary Action Against Andrew

425 N.W.2d 243, 1988 Minn. LEXIS 133, 1988 WL 66895

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedJune 20, 1988

DocketNo. CX-87-2216

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 425 N.W.2d 243 (In re Disciplinary Action Against Andrew) 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 Disciplinary Action Against Andrew, 425 N.W.2d 243, 1988 Minn. LEXIS 133, 1988 WL 66895 (Mich. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

John M. Andrew, an attorney duly admitted and licensed to practice law in the State of Minnesota, on December 29, 1987, 417 N.W.2d 267 (Minn.1987), was publicly reprimanded and placed on unsupervised probation for a period of two years thereafter. The conduct leading to the public reprimand and probation was based upon respondent’s failure to timely file employer’s quarterly withholding tax returns and failure to timely pay the taxes due thereon.

The Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board, acting through its Director, has now filed with this court a further petition in which it seeks revocation of respondent’s probation and further disciplinary action. The latter petition alleges that respondent had misappropriated client funds, has made misrepresentations to conceal his misappropriations, and has failed to maintain required trust account books and records. Following the filing of the latter petition, the Director and respondent, represented by counsel, have entered into a stipulation whereby the respondent has waived his rights under Rule 16, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR), to have oral argument before this court on the question of temporary suspension. By the stipulation, he likewise waived his right to contest the temporary suspension, and has consented to this court entering an order suspending him from the practice of law effective July 1, 1988, pending final determination of the disciplinary proceedings.

The court, having examined the initial petition, the initial order, the subsequent petition for revocation, and the stipulation,

NOW ORDERS:

1. That effective July 1, 1988, the respondent is hereby temporarily suspended from the practice of law in the State of Minnesota pending the outcome of this matter.

2. That upon his suspension on July 1, 1988, respondent shall forthwith comply with Rule 26 and 27, RLPR.

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

ORDER

John M. Andrew, an attorney duly admitted and licensed to practice law in the State of Minnesota, on December 29, 1987, 417 N.W.2d 267 (Minn.1987), was publicly reprimanded and placed on unsupervised probation for a period of two years thereafter. The conduct leading to the public reprimand and probation was based upon respondent’s failure to timely file employer’s quarterly withholding tax returns and failure to timely pay the taxes due thereon.

The Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board, acting through its Director, has now filed with this court a further petition in which it seeks revocation of respondent’s probation and further disciplinary action. The latter petition alleges that respondent had misappropriated client funds, has made misrepresentations to conceal his misappropriations, and has failed to maintain required trust account books and records. Following the filing of the latter petition, the Director and respondent, represented by counsel, have entered into a stipulation whereby the respondent has waived his rights under Rule 16, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR), to have oral argument before this court on the question of temporary suspension. By the stipulation, he likewise waived his right to contest the temporary suspension, and has consented to this court entering an order suspending him from the practice of law effective July 1, 1988, pending final determination of the disciplinary proceedings.

The court, having examined the initial petition, the initial order, the subsequent petition for revocation, and the stipulation,

NOW ORDERS:

1. That effective July 1, 1988, the respondent is hereby temporarily suspended from the practice of law in the State of Minnesota pending the outcome of this matter.

2. That upon his suspension on July 1, 1988, respondent shall forthwith comply with Rule 26 and 27, RLPR.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

425 N.W.2d 243, 1988 Minn. LEXIS 133, 1988 WL 66895, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-disciplinary-action-against-andrew-minn-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack