Opinion
A19-1117
12-17-2019
IN RE Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Joseph KAMINSKY, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0053351
ORDER
The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility has filed a petition for disciplinary action and a supplementary petition for disciplinary action alleging that respondent Joseph Kaminsky has committed professional misconduct warranting public discipline—namely, failing to communicate with a client, failing to document cash payments from clients with a receipt countersigned by the client, failing to deposit client funds into a trust account in advance of legal services being provided without a written agreement for a flat fee, failing to clearly explain the basis of his fee to a client, and failing to return unearned fees. See Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.4(a)(3), 1.5(b), 1.15(a), 1.15(c)(3), 1.15(c)(5), 1.15(h), Appendix I.
Respondent and the Director have entered into a stipulation for discipline. In it, respondent withdraws his previously filed answers, unconditionally admits the allegations in the petition and supplementary petition, and waives his rights under Rule 14, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR). The parties jointly recommend that the appropriate discipline is a 30-day suspension and 2 years of supervised probation.
The court has independently reviewed the file and approves the recommended disposition.
Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. Respondent Joseph Kaminsky is suspended from the practice of law for a minimum of 30 days, effective 14 days from the date of this order.
2. Respondent shall pay $900 in costs pursuant to Rule 24, RLPR.
3. Respondent shall comply with Rule 26, RLPR (requiring notice of suspension to clients, opposing counsel, and tribunals).
4. Respondent shall be eligible for reinstatement to the practice of law following the expiration of the suspension period provided that, not less than 15 days before the end of the suspension period, respondent files with the Clerk of the Appellate Courts and serves upon the Director an affidavit establishing that he is current in continuing legal education requirements, has complied with Rules 24 and 26, RLPR, has repaid all unearned fees to S.L., and has complied with any other conditions for reinstatement imposed by the court.
5. Within 1 year of the date of this order, respondent shall file with the Clerk of the Appellate Courts and serve upon the Director proof of 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. Failure to timely file the required documentation shall result in automatic suspension, as provided in Rule 18(e)(3), RLPR.
6. Following reinstatement, respondent shall be placed on probation for 2 years, upon the following terms and conditions:
a. Respondent shall cooperate fully with the Director’s Office in its efforts to monitor compliance with this probation. Respondent shall promptly respond to the Director’s correspondence by its due date. Respondent shall provide to the
Director a current mailing address and shall immediately notify the Director of any change of address. Respondent shall cooperate with the Director’s investigation of any allegations of unprofessional conduct that may come to the Director’s attention. Upon the Director’s request, respondent shall provide authorization for release of information and documentation to verify compliance with the terms of this probation.
b. Respondent shall abide by the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct.
c. Respondent shall be supervised by a licensed Minnesota attorney, appointed by the Director to monitor compliance with the terms of this probation. Within 2 weeks of the date of the court’s order reinstating respondent, respondent shall provide to the Director the names of four attorneys who have agreed to be nominated as respondent’s supervisor. If, after diligent effort, respondent is unable to locate a supervisor acceptable to the Director, the Director will seek to appoint a supervisor. Until a supervisor has signed a consent to supervise, the respondent shall on the first day of each month provide the Director with an inventory of active client files described in paragraph d. below. Respondent shall make active client files available to the Director on request.
d. Respondent shall cooperate fully with the supervisor in his/her efforts to monitor compliance with this probation. Respondent shall contact the supervisor and schedule a minimum of one in-person meeting per calendar quarter. Respondent shall submit to the supervisor an inventory of all active client files by the first day of each month during the probation. With respect to each active file, the inventory shall disclose the client name, type of representation, date opened, type of fee charged, most recent activity, next anticipated action, and anticipated closing date. In any file in which respondent has charged a fee described in Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.5(b)(1), respondent shall provide a copy of the written fee agreement signed by the client. Respondent’s supervisor shall file written reports with the Director at least quarterly, or at such more frequent intervals as may reasonably be requested by the Director.
e. Respondent shall initiate and maintain office procedures which ensure that there are prompt responses to correspondence, telephone calls, and other important communications from clients, courts, and other persons interested in matters which respondent is handling, and which will ensure that respondent regularly reviews each and every file and completes legal matters on a timely basis.
f. Within 30 days of the date of the court’s order reinstating respondent, respondent shall provide to the Director and to the probation supervisor, if any, a written plan outlining office procedures designed to ensure that respondent is in compliance with probation requirements. Respondent shall provide progress reports as requested.
MCKEIG, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.