IN RE DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST KELLER, 20010068.
| Decision Date | 28 March 2001 |
| Docket Number | No. 20010068.,20010068. |
| Citation | 2001 ND 63,624 N.W.2d 667 |
| Parties | In the Matter of the Application for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Michael E. KELLER, a Person Admitted to the Bar of the State of North Dakota. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of North Dakota, Petitioner, v. Michael E. Keller, Respondent. |
| Court | North Dakota Supreme Court |
INTERIM SUSPENSION ORDERED.
[¶ 1] On March 16, 2001, an Application for Interim Suspension of Michael E. Keller (Keller), a person admitted to the Bar of North Dakota, and supporting Affidavits with attached exhibits, were filed under Rule 3.4, North Dakota Rules for Lawyer Discipline (N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl.) by Loralyn K. Hegland, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel for the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court. The Affidavit indicates that complaints have been filed against Keller by clients who have not been informed that Keller's license to practice law was suspended, effective December 31, 2000, for noncompliance with rules regarding Continuing Legal Education as required by N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 6.3.
[¶ 2] On March 22, 2001, a Supplemental Affidavit in Support of Application for Interim Suspension with attached exhibits was filed by Paul W. Jacobson, Disciplinary Counsel for the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court. The Supplemental Affidavit indicates that Keller was attorney in fact for the administration of seven quarters of land on behalf of Michael Moore and his three sisters. The Supplemental Affidavit further alleges that renters of two quarters had paid Keller $22,576 in 1999 and 2000 and taxes on the land of $15,677.98 for 1999 and 2000 are unpaid. The Supplemental Affidavit asserts that there is less than $1000 in the Michael Moore account leaving a substantial sum unaccounted for.
[¶ 3] On March 28, 2001, Keller filed an Affidavit and Response to Application for Interim Suspension. Keller's Affidavit admits that he did not inform Gregary L. Atchley (Atchley) of Keller's suspension because he believed he could comply with the Continuing Legal Education requirements and be reinstated in a short time period, but found it was more difficult than expected. Keller asserts that he will immediately forward Atchley's file to him. Further, Keller's Affidavit admits that he did not inform Michael Moore (Moore) of his suspension because he did not perform legal work for Moore. Keller asserts that he will provide Moore with notice and forward his file to him within 10 days. Keller further...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
IN RE DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST KELLER
...those proceedings, but he later ceased cooperating with them despite his opportunity to present a defense. Id.; see also In re Keller, 624 N.W.2d 667, 667 (N.D.2001) (describing Keller's participation early in the North Dakota We have had occasion to examine North Dakota's disciplinary proc......
-
DISCIPLINARY BD. OF SUPREME COURT v. Keller, No. 20010227
...suspended from the practice of law on an interim basis on March 28, 2001, and has been suspended since that time. Disciplinary Board v. Keller, 624 N.W.2d 667, 2001 ND 63. [¶ 2] Four Reports of the Hearing Panel involving nine complaints against Keller were referred to the Supreme Court und......