Disciplinary Action Against Gherity, In re, C5-87-1684

Citation464 N.W.2d 719
Decision Date02 January 1991
Docket NumberNo. C5-87-1684,C5-87-1684
PartiesIn re the Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST David J. GHERITY, an Attorney at Law of the State of Minnesota.
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota (US)
ORDER

On May 23, 1988, this court placed the respondent David J. Gherity on probation for 2 years. By order dated October 4, 1989, this court extended respondent's probation until May 23, 1991 because of some additional misconduct by respondent. Most recently, on November 16, 1990, the Director of the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board filed a petition for disciplinary action with this Court alleging that respondent has committed additional professional misconduct. In this petition, the Director alleges the following: that respondent failed to appear for a pre-trial hearing on behalf of his client, Robert Koivula; that when Koivula discharged respondent, respondent failed to return the unearned portion of Koivula's retainer; and that, in January of 1990 respondent's misdemeanor criminal probation was extended until January 30, 1991, because of respondent's involvement in an altercation with two women which resulted in minor injuries to the women.

After the petition had been filed, respondent entered into a stipulation for discipline with the Director. In the stipulation, the respondent waived all of his procedural rights to hearings as provided in Rule 14 of the Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility. Respondent also waived his right to interpose an answer and unconditionally admitted all of the allegations of the petition. In explanation and mitigation, the stipulation states the following: it has been more than 1 year since the conduct alleged in the petition occurred; respondent is and has been cooperative with both his criminal probation officer and the Director; respondent's criminal probation officer has confirmed that respondent is in full compliance with the terms of his misdemeanor criminal probation and has stated that she intends to recommend that the trial court reduce the level of respondent's supervision for the balance of respondent's probation; and respondent's psychologist has reported that respondent is cooperative, regular in his attendance at counseling, and, with supervision and continued counseling, is psychologically and emotionally fit to practice law. In consideration of the above, respondent and the Director join in recommending that appropriate discipline pursuant to Rule 15, Rules on Lawyers Professional...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT