In Re the Reciprocal Discipline of Swensen

2009 ND 27, 763 N.W.2d 525, 2009 N.D. LEXIS 44, 2009 WL 905060
CourtNorth Dakota Supreme Court
DecidedApril 2, 2009
Docket20090095
StatusPublished

This text of 2009 ND 27 (In Re the Reciprocal Discipline of Swensen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re the Reciprocal Discipline of Swensen, 2009 ND 27, 763 N.W.2d 525, 2009 N.D. LEXIS 44, 2009 WL 905060 (N.D. 2009).

Opinion

DISBARMENT ORDERED

PER curiam:.

[¶ 1] On March 12, 2009, the Disciplinary Board notified the Supreme Court under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.4(D) that it was recommending the reciprocal discipline of Michael F. Swensen, a person admitted to the bar of the State of North Dakota.

[¶ 2] The Record reflects that the Minnesota Supreme Court filed its Order on November 17, 2007, disbarring Swensen from the practice of law in Minnesota for engaging in misconduct by converting rent payments and sale proceeds that were due a client, making false statements to the client and a third party, and falsely drafting, notarizing, and signing documents; and by engaging in business transactions with a client on unreasonable and undisclosed terms, without advising the client in writing to seek independent legal counsel, and without obtaining the client’s written consent to the transactions. See, In re Disciplinary Action Against Swensen, 743 N.W.2d 243 (MN 2007).

[¶ 3] The Record further reflects on January 30, 2008, the Disciplinary Board served Swensen notice under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.4(B) that a certified copy of an order of discipline entered by the Supreme Court of Minnesota was received. The notice informed Swensen he had 30 days to file any claim that imposition of the identical discipline in North Dakota would be unwarranted and the reasons for the claim.

[¶ 4] On February 6, 2008, Swensen signed a certified mail receipt acknowledging service of the notice. The Record reflects that Swensen did not serve or file a response to the notice.

[¶ 5] On March 12, 2009, the Disciplinary Board forwarded its recommendation under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.4(D) to the Supreme Court. The Disciplinary Board recommends that Swensen be disbarred from the practice of law in North Dakota. The Court considered the matter, and

[¶ 6] ORDERED, Michael F. Swensen is disbarred from the practice of law in North Dakota.

[¶ 7] FURTHER ORDERED, Michael F. Swensen comply with N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 6.3 regarding notice.

[¶ 8] GERALD W. VANDE WALLE, C.J., DANIEL J. CROTHERS, MARY *526 MUEHLEN MARING, DALE V. SANDSTROM, and CAROL RONNING KAPSNER, JJ., concur.

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

Related

In Re Disciplinary Action Against Swensen
743 N.W.2d 243 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2009 ND 27, 763 N.W.2d 525, 2009 N.D. LEXIS 44, 2009 WL 905060, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-reciprocal-discipline-of-swensen-nd-2009.