IN RE DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST PETERSON, No. CX-00-2049.
| Court | Supreme Court of Minnesota (US) |
| Writing for the Court | Alan C. Page |
| Citation | 620 N.W.2d 29 |
| Parties | In re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Brian J. PETERSON, an Attorney at Law of the State of Minnesota. |
| Docket Number | No. CX-00-2049. |
| Decision Date | 21 December 2000 |
620 N.W.2d 29
In re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Brian J. PETERSON, an Attorney at Law of the State of MinnesotaNo. CX-00-2049.
Supreme Court of Minnesota.
December 21, 2000.
The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility has filed a petition for disciplinary action alleging that respondent Brian J. Peterson has committed professional misconduct warranting public discipline, namely, respondent filed an attorney's lien against a client's homestead without a signed waiver of the homestead exemption and fabricated a waiver of the homestead exemption by cutting and pasting together a photocopied signature block and notarization block from other documents and submitted the document in an ethics investigation in violation of Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.8(j), 3.1, 3.4(b), 5.3(c), 8.1(a)(1), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d) and Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board Opinion No. 14.
Respondent admits his conduct violated the Rules of Professional Conduct and Lawyers Board Opinion No. 14, waives his rights pursuant to Rule 14, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR), and has entered into a stipulation with the Director wherein they jointly recommend that the appropriate discipline is a six-month suspension with no waiver of the reinstatement hearing provided in Rule 18, RLPR. The parties further agree that respondent may file a petition for reinstatement 90 days prior to the expiration of the six-month suspension and that reinstatement is conditioned upon completion of the six-month period of suspension, compliance with Rule 26, RLPR, successful completion of the professional responsibility portion of the bar examination pursuant to Rule 18(e), RLPR and satisfaction of the continuing legal education requirements to Rule 18(e), RLPR. Respondent, a sole practitioner, requests that the suspension not commence immediately because he has several client matters he must wind up before the suspension. Respondent represents that the Director does not oppose this request.
This court has independently reviewed the file and approves the jointly-recommended disposition.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Brian J. Peterson is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Disciplinary Action against Holker, No. A06-896.
...cases, among others, that demonstrate similar sanctions for similar misconduct: In re Wood, 716 N.W.2d 341 (Minn.2006); In re Peterson, 620 N.W.2d 29 (Minn.2000); and In re Salmen, 484 N.W.2d 253 (Minn.1992). We agree that these cases support an indefinite suspension for a minimum of six mo......
-
Scofield v. Kiffmeyer, No. C9-00-1622.
...separate from the RPUSA retained the name Reform Party of Minnesota. See id. In August of 2000, the RPUSA split into two factions. One 620 N.W.2d 29 faction chose to support Buchanan/Foster as the RPUSA's nominees for the offices of President and Vice President of the United States. The oth......
-
In re Edinger, No. A04-1276.
...relies on our prior disciplinary decisions that involved manufacturing documents to conceal misconduct. See, e.g., In re Peterson, 620 N.W.2d 29, 30 (Minn.2000) (ordering 6 months' suspension for fabricating a homestead waiver); In re Margolis, 570 N.W.2d 688, 689-90, 692 (Minn.1997) (order......
-
In re Disciplinary Action against Peterson, No. A05-646.
...with his representation of six separate clients. He was previously suspended by this court on December 21, 2000. In re Peterson, 620 N.W.2d 29, 30 (Minn.2000). That suspension was based on Peterson's misconduct in fabrication of a homestead waiver and in filing an attorney's lien against th......
-
In re Disciplinary Action against Holker, No. A06-896.
...cases, among others, that demonstrate similar sanctions for similar misconduct: In re Wood, 716 N.W.2d 341 (Minn.2006); In re Peterson, 620 N.W.2d 29 (Minn.2000); and In re Salmen, 484 N.W.2d 253 (Minn.1992). We agree that these cases support an indefinite suspension for a minimum of six mo......
-
Scofield v. Kiffmeyer, No. C9-00-1622.
...separate from the RPUSA retained the name Reform Party of Minnesota. See id. In August of 2000, the RPUSA split into two factions. One 620 N.W.2d 29 faction chose to support Buchanan/Foster as the RPUSA's nominees for the offices of President and Vice President of the United States. The oth......
-
In re Edinger, No. A04-1276.
...relies on our prior disciplinary decisions that involved manufacturing documents to conceal misconduct. See, e.g., In re Peterson, 620 N.W.2d 29, 30 (Minn.2000) (ordering 6 months' suspension for fabricating a homestead waiver); In re Margolis, 570 N.W.2d 688, 689-90, 692 (Minn.1997) (order......
-
In re Disciplinary Action against Peterson, No. A05-646.
...with his representation of six separate clients. He was previously suspended by this court on December 21, 2000. In re Peterson, 620 N.W.2d 29, 30 (Minn.2000). That suspension was based on Peterson's misconduct in fabrication of a homestead waiver and in filing an attorney's lien against th......