Opinion
A21-0600
06-09-2021
In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Brooks Richard Siegel, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0397925.
AMENDED ORDER
The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility has filed a petition for disciplinary action seeking reciprocal discipline after respondent Brooks Richard Siegel received a public reprimand and was placed on probation for 1 year in Arizona. See In re Siegel, PDJ 2020-9050, Order at 2-3 (Presiding Disc. Judge of Ariz. Sup. Ct. filed Dec. 15, 2020). Respondent was publicly reprimanded in Arizona for failing to diligently represent and directly communicate with a client for extended periods of time and failing to supervise his nonlawyer assistant. See Ariz. Sup. Ct. R. 42, ERs 1.3, 1.4, 5.1(a), 5.3(a).
Respondent and the Director have entered into a stipulation for discipline. In it, respondent waives his procedural rights under Rule 12(d), Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR), and admits the final adjudication in Arizona that he committed certain misconduct conclusively establishes that misconduct for purposes of disciplinary proceedings in Minnesota. The parties jointly recommend that the appropriate discipline is a public reprimand and 1 year of probation.
This court has independently reviewed the file and approves the jointly recommended disposition.
Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. Respondent Brooks Richard Siegel is publicly reprimanded.
2. Respondent shall pay $900 in costs pursuant to Rule 24, RLPR.
3. Respondent is placed on probation for 1 year, subject to the following terms and conditions:
a. Respondent shall cooperate fully with the terms of his Arizona probation until it ends;
b. Respondent shall comply with the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct; and
c. Upon the Director's request, respondent shall provide authorization(s) for release of information and documentation that may be necessary for the Director to monitor and/or verify respondent's compliance with the terms of the Arizona probation.
Dated: June 9, 2021
BY THE COURT:
/s/
Natalie E. Hudson
Associate Justice