From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Disciplinary Action Against Egtvedt

Supreme Court of Minnesota.
Feb 12, 2014
843 N.W.2d 223 (Minn. 2014)

Summary

imposing a 60-day suspension for, among other things, lack of diligence and failure to communicate with clients "in two client matters"

Summary of this case from In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Bosse

Opinion

No. A14–0020.

2014-02-12

In re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Paul Arthur EGTVEDT, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 282194.


ORDER

The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility filed a petition for disciplinary action alleging that respondent Paul Arthur Egtvedt committed professional misconduct warranting public discipline, namely, in two client matters lack of diligence, failure to expedite litigation, and failure to communicate with clients, failure to surrender client papers, failure to inform clients of his fee- and CLE-suspension, and noncooperation in disciplinary investigations, in violation of Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.3, 1.4, 1.16(d), 3.2, 8.1(b) and 8.4(d), and Rule 25, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR).

Respondent waives his procedural rights under Rule 14, RLPR, unconditionally admits the allegations in the petition, and, with the Director, recommends that the appropriate discipline is 60–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 Paul Arthur Egtvedt is suspended from the practice of law, effective 14 days from the date of the filing of this order, 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 and $33.53 in disbursements pursuant to Rule 24, RLPR;

4. Within 1 year of the date of filing of this order, respondent shall file with the Clerk of Appellate Courts and serve upon the Director proof of successful completion of the professional responsibility portion of the state bar examination. Failure to timely file the required documentation shall result in automatic re-suspension, as provided in Rule 18(e)(3), RLPR;

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 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, and has complied with any other conditions for reinstatement imposed by the court; and

6. Upon reinstatement to the practice of law, respondent shall be subject to probation for 2 years, subject to the following 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 the Director with 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 respondent's 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 from the date of the filing of this order, respondent shall provide the Director with the names of three 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 shall 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 client files as described in paragraph d below. Respondent shall make active client files available to the Director upon request.

d. Respondent shall cooperate fully with the supervisor's 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 the Director may reasonably request.

e. Respondent shall initiate and maintain office procedures that ensure that there are prompt responses to correspondence, telephone calls, and other important communications from clients, courts, and other persons interested in matters that respondent is handling and that will ensure that respondent regularly reviews each and every file and completes legal matters on a timely basis.

f. Respondent shall initiate or continue current treatment by a licensed consulting psychologist or other mental health professional acceptable to the Director and shall complete all therapy programs recommended by the therapist.

BY THE COURT

/s/Alan C. Page

Associate Justice


Summaries of

In re Disciplinary Action Against Egtvedt

Supreme Court of Minnesota.
Feb 12, 2014
843 N.W.2d 223 (Minn. 2014)

imposing a 60-day suspension for, among other things, lack of diligence and failure to communicate with clients "in two client matters"

Summary of this case from In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Bosse
Case details for

In re Disciplinary Action Against Egtvedt

Case Details

Full title:In re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Paul Arthur EGTVEDT, a…

Court:Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Date published: Feb 12, 2014

Citations

843 N.W.2d 223 (Minn. 2014)

Citing Cases

In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Bosse

SeeIn re Milo , 898 N.W.2d 281, 281–82 (Minn. 2017) (order) (imposing a 30-day suspension for, among other…