Opinion
A22-1090
10-11-2022
IN RE Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Brent E. LINDBERG, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0235246.
ORDER
The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility filed a petition for disciplinary action against respondent Brent E. Lindberg after the Kansas Supreme Court indefinitely suspended him. In re Lindberg , 313 Kan. 599, 485 P.3d 1194, 1204 (2021). Respondent was suspended in Kansas after he was convicted of a felony for possessing 2.71 grams of methamphetamine and failing to file an answer during the disciplinary proceeding. Respondent's misconduct violated Kansas Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(b) and Kansas Supreme Court Rule 211(b). A lawyer who receives an indefinite suspension in Kansas may petition for reinstatement 3 years after their date of suspension. Kan. Sup. Ct. R. 232(a)(2).
The parties have filed a stipulation for discipline with the court. In it, respondent waives his procedural rights under Rule 12(d), Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR), and unconditionally admits the allegations in the petition. The parties jointly recommend that the appropriate discipline is a 60-day suspension. The parties contend that reciprocal discipline is not appropriate in this case because the imposition of the same discipline would be substantially different than the discipline warranted in Minnesota.
The court has independently reviewed the file and approves the jointly recommended disposition. Although we typically impose identical discipline in a reciprocal disciplinary proceeding, identical discipline is not required if it is "substantially different from [the] discipline warranted in Minnesota." Rule 12(d), RLPR. We have imposed less severe discipline in cases involving comparable drug convictions. We have imposed short suspensions when the lawyer's possession of controlled substances was related to the practice of law or the lawyer committed additional misconduct. See In re Magnus , 954 N.W.2d 290, 290–91 (Minn. 2021) (order) (60-day suspension for felony conviction for fifth-degree possession of a controlled substance, repeated violations of court-ordered probation, and other misconduct, including neglect of two client matters, failing to communicate with a client, failing to promptly refund unearned fees, and failing to cooperate with the Director); In re Ramsay , 799 N.W.2d 604, 604–05 (Minn. 2011) (order) (90-day suspension when attorney was convicted of third-degree possession of a controlled substance "for possession of cocaine during a trial in which he was representing a criminal defendant"). We have imposed a public reprimand when the lawyer was convicted of felony possession of a controlled substance, unrelated to the practice of law. See In re Baer , 802 N.W.2d 360, 360 (Minn. 2011) (order); In re Nolen , 724 N.W.2d 14, 14–15 (Minn. 2006) (order). We conclude that an indefinite suspension, with no right to petition for reinstatement for 3 years, is substantially different from the discipline warranted in Minnesota and agree that a 60-day suspension is appropriate.
Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. Respondent Brent E. Lindberg is suspended from the practice of law for a minimum of 60 days.
2. Respondent shall comply with Rule 26, RLPR (requiring notice of suspension to clients, opposing counsel, and tribunals).
3. Respondent shall pay $900 in costs pursuant to Rule 24, RLPR.
4. Upon reinstatement to the practice of law, respondent shall be placed on probation for a period of 2 years, upon the following terms and conditions:
a. Respondent shall abide by the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct.
b. 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.
c. Respondent shall be supervised by a licensed Minnesota attorney, appointed by the Director, to monitor compliance with the terms of this probation. Respondent shall provide to the Director the names of four attorneys who have agreed to be nominated as respondent's supervisor within 2 weeks from the date of the order reinstating respondent to the practice of law. 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, 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 their 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, most recent activity, next anticipated action, and anticipated closing date. 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. Within 30 days from the date of the order reinstating respondent to the practice of law, 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.
f. Respondent shall maintain total abstinence from alcohol and other mood-altering chemicals, except that respondent may use prescription drugs in accordance with the directions of a prescribing physician who is fully advised of respondent's chemical dependency before issuing the prescription.
g. Respondent shall, at his own expense, no more than four times per month, submit to random urinalysis for drug screening at a facility approved by the Director and shall direct the drug screening facility to provide the results of all urinalysis testing to the Director's Office. If, after 6 months, all such tests have been negative, then the frequency of the random tests may be reduced. Respondent shall cooperate with the phone-in program established by the Director for the random test. Any failure to phone-in in accordance with the random test program shall be considered the same as receipt of a positive test result. Any positive test result will be grounds for revoking this probation.
5. 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 paid all required lawyer registration fees, and has complied with any other conditions for reinstatement imposed by the court.
6. 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. See Rule 4.A.(5), Rules for Admission to the Bar (requiring evidence that an applicant has successfully completed the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination). Failure to timely file the required documentation shall result in automatic suspension, as provided in Rule 18(e)(3), RLPR.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ __________
Natalie E. Hudson
Associate Justice