In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Richard H. Martin, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 68135.

Annotate this Case
In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Richard H. Martin, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 68135. A05-1650, Supreme Court Order, November 2, 2006.

STATE OF MINNESOTA

 

IN SUPREME COURT

 

A05-1650

 

 

In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against

Richard H. Martin, a Minnesota Attorney,

Registration No. 68135.

 

 

O R D E R

 

 

            By order filed on September 14, 2005, this court suspended respondent Richard H. Martin for 30 days, with reinstatement conditioned, among other things, upon respondent's successful completion of the professional responsibility portion of the state bar examination within one year from the date of filing of the order.  Although respondent was reinstated to active practice by order filed on December 29, 2005, respondent has not yet provided evidence of his successful completion of the professional responsibility portion of the state bar examination, as required by the September 14, 2005, order.

Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that respondent Richard H. Martin is suspended from the practice of law until such time as respondent provides evidence of successful completion of the professional responsibility portion of the state bar examination.  Respondent's suspension shall be effective 14 days from the date of this order.  Respondent shall comply with Rule 26, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR) and shall provide written notice of his suspension to clients, opposing counsel, and tribunals. 

Dated:  October 25, 2006

                                                                        BY THE COURT:

 

                                                                            /s/                                                          

                                                                        Helen M. Meyer

                                                                        Associate Justice

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.