Minnesota Supreme Court, 1926

In re Disbarment of Andrew Nelson

In re Disbarment of Andrew Nelson
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided June 11, 1926 · PER CURIAM.
209 N.W. 316; 167 Minn. 467; 1926 Minn. LEXIS 1355 (North Western Reporter)

Counsel

Albert Schaller , for accused. Harold G. Cant , for respondent.

Can I rely on this case?

Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.

(as of 9/30/2026)

Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1987, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.

Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error

In re Disbarment of Andrew Nelson

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Pee Curiam.

The accusation of professional misconduct lodged against respondent by the Board of Law Examiners was referred to Honorable Charles Bechhoefer, one of the judges of the district court for Ramsey county. After hearing the evidence, he has made findings which in all things acquit respondent of the charge in question. Our examination of the record has led to the conclusion not only that the findings are sustained but also that the evidence would not warrant the contrary result. The judgment of the court therefore is that respondent be and he is hereby found not guilty of the charges made in the accusation and that he be and is hereby acquitted of the same and all thereof.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.