Disciplinary Action Against Mose, In re, No. C9-89-1076

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota (US)
Citation443 N.W.2d 191
Decision Date19 July 1989
PartiesIn re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST William G. MOSE, an Attorney at Law of the State of Minnesota.
Docket NumberNo. C9-89-1076

Page 191

443 N.W.2d 191
In re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST William G.
MOSE, an Attorney at Law of the State of
Minnesota.
No. C9-89-1076.
Supreme Court of Minnesota.
July 19, 1989.
ORDER

The Director of Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board filed with this court a petition in which he alleged that the respondent William G. Mose had violated several of the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct to the extent that he should be subjected to public discipline. In substance the petition alleged that during the course of representing a client in one dissolution matter, the respondent had failed to timely answer interrogatories, to notify opposing counsel that his client would be unable to attend certain scheduled settlement conferences, and failed to provide evidence of his client's income to aid the court at a hearing with respect to setting temporary support, had failed to timely seek reduction of child support and elimination of attorney fees awarded by court order, had failed to pay the court awarded attorney fees or seek to have the order set aside, had failed to prepare adequately for court conferences or hearings, and that all the aforesaid conduct

Page 192

violated the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct including, but not limited to Rules 1.1, 1.3, 3.4(d) and 8.4(d). With respect to another matter in which the respondent was retained to represent groups of employees and creditors owed wages from a corporation, the petition alleged that respondent violated his professional responsibilities by not properly drafting a complaint, in failing to pursue the restitution moneys, in failing to communicate with clients or answer their inquiries, and in failing to redraft a complaint or file an affidavit of default and supporting memoranda after being directed to do so by the court. These failures, the petition charged, violated Rules 1.1 and 8.4(d), 1.4 and 3.4(c) of the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct. Subsequently, the Director and the respondent entered into a stipulation wherein the respondent waived all of his procedural rights pursuant to Rules 14 and 15 of the Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility. In the stipulation, the respondent admitted all of the allegations of the petition. Also in the stipulation, the Director and the respondent joined in recommending that appropriate discipline be a public reprimand followed by two years of supervised probation.

The court having considered the petition, the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • In re Reinstatement of Mose, No. A07-0437.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Minnesota (US)
    • August 7, 2008
    ...and placing him on 2 years of supervised probation.2 We accepted the stipulation and imposed the recommended sanctions. In re Mose, 443 N.W.2d 191 In 1990, the Director petitioned to revoke Mose's probation. The Director alleged that Mose had not complied with his probation conditions and t......
  • In re Petition for Reinstatement Mose, No. A12–0380.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Minnesota (US)
    • March 12, 2014
    ...stipulated that the misconduct occurred. We publicly reprimanded Mose and placed him on probation for two years. In re Mose ( Mose I ), 443 N.W.2d 191, 192 (Minn.1989). We also ordered him to complete a trial advocacy skills course and pay restitution to two former clients. Id. In 1990, the......
  • Disciplinary Action Against Pokorny, In re, No. C9-89-719
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Minnesota (US)
    • March 30, 1990
    ...as an excuse for nonpayment. We have subjected attorneys to discipline for neglecting professional obligations. E.g., In re Mose, 443 N.W.2d 191, 191-92 (Minn.1989) (mishandling client matters and failing to pay court-awarded fees warrants supervised probation); In re Peters, 332 N.W.2d 10,......
  • Disciplinary Action Against Mose, In re, No. C9-89-1076
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Minnesota (US)
    • July 16, 1990
    ...of Minnesota. No. C9-89-1076. Supreme Court of Minnesota. July 16, 1990. ORDER WHEREAS, by order of this court filed on July 19, 1989, 443 N.W.2d 191, the respondent William G. Mose was publicly reprimanded and placed on two years' supervised probation subject to compliance with a number of......
4 cases
  • In re Reinstatement of Mose, No. A07-0437.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Minnesota (US)
    • August 7, 2008
    ...and placing him on 2 years of supervised probation.2 We accepted the stipulation and imposed the recommended sanctions. In re Mose, 443 N.W.2d 191 In 1990, the Director petitioned to revoke Mose's probation. The Director alleged that Mose had not complied with his probation conditions and t......
  • In re Petition for Reinstatement Mose, No. A12–0380.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Minnesota (US)
    • March 12, 2014
    ...stipulated that the misconduct occurred. We publicly reprimanded Mose and placed him on probation for two years. In re Mose ( Mose I ), 443 N.W.2d 191, 192 (Minn.1989). We also ordered him to complete a trial advocacy skills course and pay restitution to two former clients. Id. In 1990, the......
  • Disciplinary Action Against Pokorny, In re, No. C9-89-719
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Minnesota (US)
    • March 30, 1990
    ...as an excuse for nonpayment. We have subjected attorneys to discipline for neglecting professional obligations. E.g., In re Mose, 443 N.W.2d 191, 191-92 (Minn.1989) (mishandling client matters and failing to pay court-awarded fees warrants supervised probation); In re Peters, 332 N.W.2d 10,......
  • Disciplinary Action Against Mose, In re, No. C9-89-1076
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Minnesota (US)
    • July 16, 1990
    ...of Minnesota. No. C9-89-1076. Supreme Court of Minnesota. July 16, 1990. ORDER WHEREAS, by order of this court filed on July 19, 1989, 443 N.W.2d 191, the respondent William G. Mose was publicly reprimanded and placed on two years' supervised probation subject to compliance with a number of......

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