In re Disciplinary Action Against Dumbaugh

Supreme Court of Minnesota

In re Disciplinary Action Against Dumbaugh

445 N.W.2d 534, 1989 Minn. LEXIS 229, 1989 WL 107988

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedSeptember 11, 1989

DocketNo. C6-89-1553

StatusPublished

This text of 445 N.W.2d 534 (In re Disciplinary Action Against Dumbaugh) 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 Dumbaugh, 445 N.W.2d 534, 1989 Minn. LEXIS 229, 1989 WL 107988 (Mich. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The Respondent Robert Frederick Dum-baugh has been admitted to practice law in the State of Minnesota since December 30, 1986. Until his disbarment by the Supreme Court of Iowa on February 15, 1989, Respondent was likewise admitted to practice in Iowa.

Following his conviction in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa of the crimes of embezzlement by a bankruptcy trustee in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 153 and of filing false bankruptcy accounting in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 152, both crimes being felonies, the respondent was sentenced to imprisonment for a term of 48 months for the embezzlement and for an additional period of five years for the false accounting, and is presently incarcerated a.t the Federal Correctional Institution in Sandstone, Minnesota.

The Director of Lawyers Professional Responsibility in Minnesota has filed with this court a petition alleging the foregoing facts and seeking an order disbarring the respondent from the practice of law. The Director and the Respondent subsequently entered into a stipulation wherein the Respondent waived his procedural rights under Rule 14, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility, and waived his right to interpose an answer to the petition and instead unconditionally admitted the allegations of the petition. Moreover, in the stipulation both the Director and the Respondent join in recommending to this court that appropriate discipline is that this court, pursuant to Rule 15, RLPR, disbar the respondent.

The court having considered the Director’s petition and the stipulation entered into between the Director and the Respondent NOW ORDERS:

1. The Respondent Robert Frederick Dumbaugh is hereby disbarred from the practice of law.

2. The Director is awarded payment of $750 in costs pursuant to Rule 24, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility.

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

ORDER

The Respondent Robert Frederick Dum-baugh has been admitted to practice law in the State of Minnesota since December 30, 1986. Until his disbarment by the Supreme Court of Iowa on February 15, 1989, Respondent was likewise admitted to practice in Iowa.

Following his conviction in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa of the crimes of embezzlement by a bankruptcy trustee in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 153 and of filing false bankruptcy accounting in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 152, both crimes being felonies, the respondent was sentenced to imprisonment for a term of 48 months for the embezzlement and for an additional period of five years for the false accounting, and is presently incarcerated a.t the Federal Correctional Institution in Sandstone, Minnesota.

The Director of Lawyers Professional Responsibility in Minnesota has filed with this court a petition alleging the foregoing facts and seeking an order disbarring the respondent from the practice of law. The Director and the Respondent subsequently entered into a stipulation wherein the Respondent waived his procedural rights under Rule 14, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility, and waived his right to interpose an answer to the petition and instead unconditionally admitted the allegations of the petition. Moreover, in the stipulation both the Director and the Respondent join in recommending to this court that appropriate discipline is that this court, pursuant to Rule 15, RLPR, disbar the respondent.

The court having considered the Director’s petition and the stipulation entered into between the Director and the Respondent NOW ORDERS:

1. The Respondent Robert Frederick Dumbaugh is hereby disbarred from the practice of law.

2. The Director is awarded payment of $750 in costs pursuant to Rule 24, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

445 N.W.2d 534, 1989 Minn. LEXIS 229, 1989 WL 107988, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-disciplinary-action-against-dumbaugh-minn-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack