In re the Disciplinary Action Against Graham

489 N.W.2d 232, 1992 Minn. LEXIS 396, 1992 WL 235364
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedSeptember 21, 1992
DocketNo. CX-92-948
StatusPublished

This text of 489 N.W.2d 232 (In re the Disciplinary Action Against Graham) 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 the Disciplinary Action Against Graham, 489 N.W.2d 232, 1992 Minn. LEXIS 396, 1992 WL 235364 (Mich. 1992).

Opinion

ORDER

WHEREAS, by petition for disciplinary action filed May 20, 1992, and the amended and supplementary petition filed July 21, 1992, the Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility charged respondent Timothy E. Graham with professional misconduct; and

WHEREAS, this court appointed a referee to hear the evidence and make a report of his findings of fact, conclusions of law and recommendation; and

WHEREAS, on September 14, 1992, the referee filed his report with this court in which he recommended to this court that respondent be disbarred from the practice of law; and

WHEREAS, Rule 16(e), Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility, provides that upon a referee’s recommendation of disbarment, the respondent lawyer’s authority to practice law shall be suspended pending final determination of the disciplinary proceeding, unless the referee directs otherwise or this court orders otherwise; and

WHEREAS, the Director has requested that this court suspend respondent from the practice of law pending this court’s final determination in these disciplinary proceedings.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. That, effective immediately, the respondent, Timothy E. Graham, is suspended from the practice of law pending a final determination by this court of this disciplinary proceeding against him.

2. That, within 10 days of the date of this order, the respondent shall notify each of his clients of his inability to continue [233]*233representation of the client and otherwise shall comply fully with the provisions of Rule 26, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
489 N.W.2d 232, 1992 Minn. LEXIS 396, 1992 WL 235364, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-disciplinary-action-against-graham-minn-1992.