On Monday, April 26, 2023, the Supreme Court of the State of Minnesota ordered the suspension of Minneapolis attorney Herbert Azubuike Igbanugo for committing 50 rule violations across seven client matters.
The case is styled ‘In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Herbert Azubuike Igbanugo,’ and was brought by the Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility under case #A21-0338.
The charges cited Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct 1.3, 1.4(a)(3), 1.4(b), 1.5(a), 1.5(b)(2), 1.15(c)(4), 1.16(d), 5.1(a), 5.3(a), 5.3(b), and 8.4(c).
The rules of professional conduct can be found here.
According to the court document, the Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility filed a disciplinary action against Igbanugo, accusing him of 54 violations of the Minnesota rules of professional conduct.
The filing states:
“Igbanugo moved to dismiss the disciplinary petition, alleging that his constitutional due process, equal protection, free speech, and Fourth Amendment rights were violated.”
Following a hearing, the referee found Igbanugo guilty of 50 rule violations in relation to seven client cases. These violations included lack of diligence, failure to inform clients of important updates, inadequate explanation of legal matters, charging excessive fees, failure to refund unearned fees promptly, failure to ensure compliance with professional obligations within the firm, and providing false and misleading information.
The referee identified five aggravating factors and determined that Igbanugo’s constitutional rights were not violated during the disciplinary process. The referee recommended a 10-month suspension from the practice of law for Igbanugo.
Igbanugo disputed the referee’s findings, conclusions, and evidentiary decisions, claiming that his constitutional rights were violated during the proceedings and investigation.
The Director argues that the recommended discipline is too lenient and requests a minimum suspension of 1 year.
The court concluded that the referee’s findings and conclusions were not clearly mistaken and that their evidentiary decisions were appropriate.
In view of Igbanugo’s claim that his constitutional rights were violated throughout the discipline process, the Court ruled that Igbanugo’s procedural due process was not violated because the disciplinary charges against him were detailed, specific, and supported by evidence.
A 52-page petition listed the rules he allegedly violated, and Igbanugo responded with a 160-page answer. Moreover, Igbanugo was given a fair two-week evidentiary hearing where he presented exhibits, testified, and called witnesses. These procedures align with the principles in the Nielson case, which emphasize that attorneys are entitled to due process when they are given a fair chance to present their evidence, cross-examine opposing witnesses and have their exhibits admitted.
In light of the foregoing facts and discussion, the Court ruled that the appropriate discipline for Igbanugo’s misconduct is an indefinite suspension with no right to petition for reinstatement for 10 months.
The Disposition reads:
“Respondent Herbert Azubuike Igbanugo is suspended from the practice of law, effective 14 days from the date of this opinion, with no right to petition for reinstatement for 10 months.
Respondent may petition for reinstatement pursuant to Rule 18(a)–(d), RLPR. Reinstatement is conditioned on successful completion of the written examination required for admission to the practice of law by the State Board of Law Examiners on the subject of professional responsibility. . . nd satisfaction of continuing legal education requirements.”
Igbanugo was further ordered to pay costs amounting to $900.
Mr. Herbert Azubuike Igbanugo is listed as the founding shareholding, managing partner, and attorney at law of the law firm Igbanugo Partners International Law Firm, PLLC. He graduated from Hamline University School of Law in 1987, and he has been admitted to practice in Minnesota since 1988.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
