In re Disciplinary Action Against Hunter

463 N.W.2d 535, 1990 Minn. LEXIS 399, 1990 WL 200172
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedDecember 10, 1990
DocketNo. C2-89-934
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 463 N.W.2d 535 (In re Disciplinary Action Against Hunter) 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 Hunter, 463 N.W.2d 535, 1990 Minn. LEXIS 399, 1990 WL 200172 (Mich. 1990).

Opinion

ORDER

The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility has filed a petition with this court seeking revocation of probation and further disciplinary action against respondent, James W. Hunter, Jr. The petition alleges that respondent, while on probation from a previous disciplinary action, committed misconduct including misappropriation of client funds by means of forgery and misrepresentation, failure to cooperate with the Director’s investigation, unauthorized practice of law during his disciplinary suspension, and suspension for non-payment of attorney registration fees. In conjunction with those proceedings, the Director has petitioned this court, pursuant to Rule 16, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR), for an order temporarily suspending respondent from the practice of law pending final disposition of the disciplinary proceedings. The Director asserts that the continuation of respondent’s authority to practice law may result in risk of injury to the public, within the meaning of Rule 16(a), RLPR. Respondent, by letter dated November 30, 1990, has indicated to the court that he does not contest entry of the proposed order.

Having considered the files, records and proceedings herein,

IT IS ORDERED:

1) That the respondent James W. Hunter, Jr., be and hereby is, temporarily suspended from the practice of law pending final determination of the disciplinary proceedings, pursuant to Rule 16, RLPR.

2) That respondent shall, within 10 days of this order, notify each of his clients of his inability to continue representation of the client, and shall otherwise fully comply with Rule 26, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility.

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

Related

In Re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Hunter
473 N.W.2d 866 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
463 N.W.2d 535, 1990 Minn. LEXIS 399, 1990 WL 200172, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-disciplinary-action-against-hunter-minn-1990.