You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

In Re Petition for Reinstatement of Peter Daniel PLUNKETT, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 169304

Citation: 848 N.W.2d 233Docket: A13-2083

Court: Supreme Court of Minnesota; July 2, 2014; Minnesota; State Supreme Court

Original Court Document: View Document

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil
Peter Daniel Plunkett, a Minnesota attorney, was indefinitely suspended from practicing law in February 2013, with a prohibition on petitioning for reinstatement for six months. He petitioned for reinstatement in November 2013, and after a hearing, the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board panel found he demonstrated his moral fitness to practice law by clear and convincing evidence. The panel recommended his reinstatement with a two-year supervised probation, which the Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility supported.

The Minnesota Supreme Court ordered Plunkett's reinstatement with specific conditions for his two-year probation, including:

1. Full cooperation with the Director's office, timely responses to correspondence, and immediate notification of any address changes.
2. Compliance with the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct.
3. Appointment of a licensed Minnesota attorney as a supervisor, with Plunkett required to propose four potential supervisors within two weeks.
4. Regular inventory submissions of active client files to the Director and the supervisor, along with disclosures of any investigations or litigations against him.
5. Quarterly meetings with the supervisor and submission of reports to the Director.
6. Ongoing counseling sessions with an acceptable counselor to address issues leading to his previous discipline.
7. Ensuring his firm name complies with professional conduct rules upon returning to practice.

If Plunkett violates the probation terms or engages in further misconduct, the Director can file a petition for disciplinary action directly with the Minnesota Supreme Court, without prior review by a panel. The document was signed by an Associate Justice on June 26, 2014.