In Re Disciplinary Action Against Truelson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

In Re Disciplinary Action Against Truelson

427 N.W.2d 674, 1988 Minn. LEXIS 207, 1988 WL 90442

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedAugust 29, 1988

DocketC2-88-1278

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 427 N.W.2d 674 (In Re Disciplinary Action Against Truelson) 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 Truelson, 427 N.W.2d 674, 1988 Minn. LEXIS 207, 1988 WL 90442 (Mich. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

Following the filing of a petition charging the respondent with misconduct justifying the imposition of public discipline, the respondent and the Director entered into a stipulation recommending indefinite suspension. By the terms of the stipulation, the respondent has waived all of his rights afforded him pursuant to Rule 14, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility and has unconditionally admitted the allegations of the petition. In general those allegations charged the respondent with failure to adequately communicate with clients and to respond to discovery requests and court’s order compelling discovery in two separate matters. He was likewise charged with failing to respond to request to commence collection proceedings for a number of months. Finally, it was alleged that respondent had failed to cooperate with the disciplinary investigation in violation of Rule 25, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility and In re Cartwright, 282 N.W.2d 548 (Minn.1979).

The court having considered the petition, the admissions of the respondent and the stipulation NOW ORDERS:

1. The respondent forthwith shall be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Minnesota.

2. The respondent may apply for reinstatement provided that the respondent furnishes to the court proof that all the requirements of Rule 18, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility have been met. Respondent shall not be reinstated unless he provides written verification that he has devised office procedures which will insure prompt responses to correspondence, telephone calls and other important communications from clients, courts, and other persons interested in matters which respon *675 dent will be handling and which will insure that respondent regularly reviews each and every file and completes legal matters on a timely basis.

3. Respondent shall pay to the Director as costs pursuant to Rule 24(a), Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility the sum of $750 within 60 days from the date of this order.

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

ORDER

Following the filing of a petition charging the respondent with misconduct justifying the imposition of public discipline, the respondent and the Director entered into a stipulation recommending indefinite suspension. By the terms of the stipulation, the respondent has waived all of his rights afforded him pursuant to Rule 14, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility and has unconditionally admitted the allegations of the petition. In general those allegations charged the respondent with failure to adequately communicate with clients and to respond to discovery requests and court’s order compelling discovery in two separate matters. He was likewise charged with failing to respond to request to commence collection proceedings for a number of months. Finally, it was alleged that respondent had failed to cooperate with the disciplinary investigation in violation of Rule 25, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility and In re Cartwright, 282 N.W.2d 548 (Minn.1979).

The court having considered the petition, the admissions of the respondent and the stipulation NOW ORDERS:

1. The respondent forthwith shall be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Minnesota.

2. The respondent may apply for reinstatement provided that the respondent furnishes to the court proof that all the requirements of Rule 18, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility have been met. Respondent shall not be reinstated unless he provides written verification that he has devised office procedures which will insure prompt responses to correspondence, telephone calls and other important communications from clients, courts, and other persons interested in matters which respon *675 dent will be handling and which will insure that respondent regularly reviews each and every file and completes legal matters on a timely basis.

3. Respondent shall pay to the Director as costs pursuant to Rule 24(a), Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility the sum of $750 within 60 days from the date of this order.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

427 N.W.2d 674, 1988 Minn. LEXIS 207, 1988 WL 90442, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-disciplinary-action-against-truelson-minn-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack