In re the Discipline of Scow

Supreme Court of Minnesota

In re the Discipline of Scow

300 N.W.2d 176, 1980 Minn. LEXIS 1647

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedDecember 19, 1980

DocketNo. 51320

StatusPublished

This text of 300 N.W.2d 176 (In re the Discipline of Scow) 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 Discipline of Scow, 300 N.W.2d 176, 1980 Minn. LEXIS 1647 (Mich. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board, through its administrative director, brought disciplinary proceedings against respondent for neglectful and dilatory handling of specified probate matters. In July 1977, petitioner and respondent entered into a stipulation whereby those proceedings were stayed provided certain conditions were met.

We find that all conditions of the stipulation have now been met, respondent has turned over all files to another attorney, has closed his office, and has announced his retirement. Investigation of respondent’s files has revealed no harm or financial loss to any client. Under these facts and circumstances, we grant petitioner’s request that respondent be permitted to resign from the practice of law.

SIMONETT, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

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

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board, through its administrative director, brought disciplinary proceedings against respondent for neglectful and dilatory handling of specified probate matters. In July 1977, petitioner and respondent entered into a stipulation whereby those proceedings were stayed provided certain conditions were met.

We find that all conditions of the stipulation have now been met, respondent has turned over all files to another attorney, has closed his office, and has announced his retirement. Investigation of respondent’s files has revealed no harm or financial loss to any client. Under these facts and circumstances, we grant petitioner’s request that respondent be permitted to resign from the practice of law.

SIMONETT, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

300 N.W.2d 176, 1980 Minn. LEXIS 1647, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-discipline-of-scow-minn-1980.