In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Herbert A. Igbanugo, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0191139. ...

Citation:

Court: Minnesota Supreme Court · Filed: 2026-04-01 · Docket: A241119
Published
Impact Score: 0/100 — Low impact: This case is narrowly focused with minimal precedential value.

Case Overview

In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Herbert A. Igbanugo, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0191139. ... is a court opinion from the Minnesota Supreme Court, filed on 2026-04-01 (Docket No. A241119).

Precedential Status: Published. This opinion may be cited as authority in future cases.

CaseLawBrief is currently processing this opinion through our AI enrichment pipeline to generate a comprehensive plain-English summary, key holdings analysis, entity extraction, and practical legal insights. The full analysis will include multiple perspectives for legal practitioners, students, and the general public.

AI-generated summary for informational purposes only. Not legal advice. May contain errors. Consult a licensed attorney for legal advice.

Court Syllabus

1. The referee's finding that the attorney committed misconduct by filing a frivolous lawsuit was not clearly erroneous. 2. An indefinite suspension with no right to petition for reinstatement for 12 months is the appropriate discipline for the attorney's misconduct. Suspended.

Case Details

Case NameIn re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Herbert A. Igbanugo, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0191139. ...
Citation
CourtMinnesota Supreme Court
Date Filed2026-04-01
Docket NumberA241119
Precedential StatusPublished
Impact Score0 / 100
Jurisdictionmn

Related Legal Resources

Minnesota Supreme Court Opinions mn Jurisdiction Home Search Cases Is It Legal? 2026 Cases All Courts All Topics States Rankings

About This Analysis

This AI-generated analysis of In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Herbert A. Igbanugo, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0191139. ... was produced by CaseLawBrief to help legal professionals, researchers, students, and the general public understand this court opinion in plain English.

CaseLawBrief aggregates court opinions from CourtListener, a project of the Free Law Project, and enriches them with AI-powered analysis. Our goal is to make the law more accessible and understandable to everyone, regardless of their legal background.

AI-generated summary for informational purposes only. Not legal advice. May contain errors. Consult a licensed attorney for legal advice.

Related Cases

Other opinions from the Minnesota Supreme Court: