In re the Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Anderson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

In re the Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Anderson

485 N.W.2d 569, 1992 WL 148307

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedJune 24, 1992

DocketNo. C0-92-1140

StatusPublished

This text of 485 N.W.2d 569 (In re the Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Anderson) 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 Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Anderson, 485 N.W.2d 569, 1992 WL 148307 (Mich. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

On June 19, 1992, the Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility filed with this Court a petition alleging that the respondent, Harold W.E. Anderson, has engaged in repeated and extensive misappropriation of client funds and has committed other professional misconduct. The Director also filed a stipulation between himself and the respondent in which the respondent agreed to dispense with proceedings under Rule 16, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility, and agreed that the Court may enter its order suspending the respondent from the practice of law pending final determination of these disciplinary proceedings.

The Court, having considered all of the facts and circumstances surrounding this matter, the petition of the Director, and the stipulation of the parties, NOW ORDERS:

1. That the respondent, Harold W.E. Anderson, hereby is temporarily suspended from the practice of law pending final determination of these disciplinary proceedings, pursuant to Rule 16, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility.

2. That respondent shall, within 10 days of the date of this order, notify each of his clients of his inability to continue representation of the client and otherwise shall comply fully with the provisions of Rules 26 and 27, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility.

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

ORDER

On June 19, 1992, the Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility filed with this Court a petition alleging that the respondent, Harold W.E. Anderson, has engaged in repeated and extensive misappropriation of client funds and has committed other professional misconduct. The Director also filed a stipulation between himself and the respondent in which the respondent agreed to dispense with proceedings under Rule 16, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility, and agreed that the Court may enter its order suspending the respondent from the practice of law pending final determination of these disciplinary proceedings.

The Court, having considered all of the facts and circumstances surrounding this matter, the petition of the Director, and the stipulation of the parties, NOW ORDERS:

1. That the respondent, Harold W.E. Anderson, hereby is temporarily suspended from the practice of law pending final determination of these disciplinary proceedings, pursuant to Rule 16, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility.

2. That respondent shall, within 10 days of the date of this order, notify each of his clients of his inability to continue representation of the client and otherwise shall comply fully with the provisions of Rules 26 and 27, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

485 N.W.2d 569, 1992 WL 148307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-petition-for-disciplinary-action-against-anderson-minn-1992.