In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST David Edwin WANDLING, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0232312

Supreme Court of Minnesota

In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST David Edwin WANDLING, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0232312

880 N.W.2d 362, 2016 Minn. LEXIS 338, 2016 WL 3268576

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedJune 13, 2016

DocketA15-1946

StatusPublished

This text of 880 N.W.2d 362 (In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST David Edwin WANDLING, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0232312) 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 Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST David Edwin WANDLING, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0232312, 880 N.W.2d 362, 2016 Minn. LEXIS 338, 2016 WL 3268576 (Mich. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility filed a petition for disciplinary action alleging that respondent David Edwin Wandling committed professional misconduct warranting public discipline — namely, misappropriating client funds; making false statements to conceal the misappropriation; failing to comply with court rules; failing to maintain trust account books and records; engaging in trust-account violations; failing to provide written notice of disbursements of earned fees; and making false statements to the Director. See Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.15(a), (b), (c)(3) — (5), and (h), as interpreted by Appendix 1 thereto, 3.4(c), 4.1, 8.1(a)-(b), and 8.4(c)-(d), and Rule 25, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR).

The parties have filed an amended stipulation for discipline with the court. In it, respondent withdraws his previously filed answer, admits the allegations in the petition for disciplinary action, except for one paragraph, and waives his rights pursuant to Rule 14, RLPR. The parties recommend that, in light of mitigating factors, the appropriate discipline is an indefinite suspension with no right to petition for reinstatement for 30 months.

The court has independently reviewed the file and approves the recommended discipline.

Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. Respondent David Edwin Wandling is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law, effective 14 days from the date of this order, with no right to petition for reinstatement for 30 months from the effective date of his suspension.

2. 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 and satisfaction of continuing legal education requirements pursuant to Rule 18(e), RLPR.

3. Respondent shall comply with Rule 26, RLPR (requiring notice of suspension to clients, opposing counsel, and tribunals) and shall pay $900' in costs pursuant to Rule 24, RLPR.

BY THE COURT:

/s/_ David R. Stras 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 filed a petition for disciplinary action alleging that respondent David Edwin Wandling committed professional misconduct warranting public discipline — namely, misappropriating client funds; making false statements to conceal the misappropriation; failing to comply with court rules; failing to maintain trust account books and records; engaging in trust-account violations; failing to provide written notice of disbursements of earned fees; and making false statements to the Director. See Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.15(a), (b), (c)(3) — (5), and (h), as interpreted by Appendix 1 thereto, 3.4(c), 4.1, 8.1(a)-(b), and 8.4(c)-(d), and Rule 25, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR).

The parties have filed an amended stipulation for discipline with the court. In it, respondent withdraws his previously filed answer, admits the allegations in the petition for disciplinary action, except for one paragraph, and waives his rights pursuant to Rule 14, RLPR. The parties recommend that, in light of mitigating factors, the appropriate discipline is an indefinite suspension with no right to petition for reinstatement for 30 months.

The court has independently reviewed the file and approves the recommended discipline.

Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. Respondent David Edwin Wandling is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law, effective 14 days from the date of this order, with no right to petition for reinstatement for 30 months from the effective date of his suspension.

2. 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 and satisfaction of continuing legal education requirements pursuant to Rule 18(e), RLPR.

3. Respondent shall comply with Rule 26, RLPR (requiring notice of suspension to clients, opposing counsel, and tribunals) and shall pay $900' in costs pursuant to Rule 24, RLPR.

BY THE COURT:

/s/_ David R. Stras Associate Justice

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

880 N.W.2d 362, 2016 Minn. LEXIS 338, 2016 WL 3268576, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-petition-for-disciplinary-action-against-david-edwin-wandling-a-minn-2016.