In Re Disciplinary Action Against Burseth

Supreme Court of Minnesota

In Re Disciplinary Action Against Burseth

630 N.W.2d 426, 2001 Minn. LEXIS 479, 2001 WL 869213

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedJuly 26, 2001

DocketCX-00-2004

StatusPublished

This text of 630 N.W.2d 426 (In Re Disciplinary Action Against Burseth) 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 Disciplinary Action Against Burseth, 630 N.W.2d 426, 2001 Minn. LEXIS 479, 2001 WL 869213 (Mich. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility has filed a petition for revocation of probation and for further disciplinary action alleging that re *427 spondent James M. Burseth has committed professional misconduct warranting public discipline, namely, violating the terms of his private probation by failing to abstain from nonprescription, mood-altering drugs in violation of Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(d).

Respondent admits his conduct violated the Rules of Professional Conduct; waives his rights under Rule 14, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR); and has entered into a stipulation with the Director wherein they jointly recommend that the appropriate discipline is a public reprimand and public probation through the later of January 14, 2002, or until respondent has produced 6 consecutive months of valid (nondiluted) negative urinalysis test results. The stipulation also recommends as appropriate discipline that Respondent shall also comply with all other terms of his January 14, 2000, private probation.

This court has independently reviewed the file and approves the jointly recommended disposition.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that respondent James M. Burseth is publicly reprimanded and placed on public probation until the later of January 14, 2002, or until respondent has produced 6 consecutive months of valid (non-diluted) negative urinalysis test results. Respondent shall comply with all other terms of his January 14, 2000, private probation while on public probation and shall pay $900 in costs and disbursements under Rule 24, RLPR.

BY THE COURT

Paul H. Anderson Associate Justice

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

ORDER

The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility has filed a petition for revocation of probation and for further disciplinary action alleging that re *427 spondent James M. Burseth has committed professional misconduct warranting public discipline, namely, violating the terms of his private probation by failing to abstain from nonprescription, mood-altering drugs in violation of Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(d).

Respondent admits his conduct violated the Rules of Professional Conduct; waives his rights under Rule 14, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR); and has entered into a stipulation with the Director wherein they jointly recommend that the appropriate discipline is a public reprimand and public probation through the later of January 14, 2002, or until respondent has produced 6 consecutive months of valid (nondiluted) negative urinalysis test results. The stipulation also recommends as appropriate discipline that Respondent shall also comply with all other terms of his January 14, 2000, private probation.

This court has independently reviewed the file and approves the jointly recommended disposition.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that respondent James M. Burseth is publicly reprimanded and placed on public probation until the later of January 14, 2002, or until respondent has produced 6 consecutive months of valid (non-diluted) negative urinalysis test results. Respondent shall comply with all other terms of his January 14, 2000, private probation while on public probation and shall pay $900 in costs and disbursements under Rule 24, RLPR.

BY THE COURT

Paul H. Anderson Associate Justice

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

630 N.W.2d 426, 2001 Minn. LEXIS 479, 2001 WL 869213, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-disciplinary-action-against-burseth-minn-2001.