Minnesota Sanctions Longtime Attorney

The Minnesota Supreme Court sanctioned an attorney who has been in solo practice for over 50 years

Kaminsky has a substantial disciplinary history spanning over 43 years of his practice, including nine admonishments, two private probations, and two suspensions. Notably, he has been previously disciplined for the same type of misconduct underlying several violations in the petition.

Here

The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility (Director) filed a petition for revocation of probation and for further disciplinary action against respondent Joseph Kaminsky. The Director alleged that for more than 5 years, Kaminsky violated many rules of professional conduct in three client matters. We appointed a referee, who concluded that Kaminsky violated 16 rules of the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct, some of them more than once. These violations include filing a false affidavit with a court, failing to properly supervise staff, neglecting a client, failing to represent another client competently and diligently, and failing to deposit advanced fees in a trust account without a flat fee agreement. Several of these violations occurred while Kaminsky was on disciplinary probation. The referee recommended that Kaminsky be suspended indefinitely, with no right to petition for reinstatement for a minimum of 9 months.

Kaminsky ordered a transcript and challenged three of the referee’s conclusions and the recommended discipline. The Director agrees with the referee’s conclusions and recommended discipline. We conclude that the referee did not err in her conclusions and that, given the unique facts of this case, the appropriate discipline is an indefinite suspension with no right to petition for reinstatement for 9 months.

No stay of the suspension

Kaminsky argues that the recommended discipline is punitive, and that any discipline should be stayed because of his impending retirement. Kaminsky cites two cases in which we imposed a stayed suspension. Neither case, however, involves acts of misconduct committed while the lawyer was on probation for similar misconduct, and one of the cases involved reciprocal discipline. See In re Meyer, 601 N.W.2d 706, 706–07 (Minn. 1999) (order); see also In re Leroi, 869 N.W.2d 671, 672 (Minn. 2014) (order). Although we have occasionally imposed a stayed suspension in a non-reciprocal discipline case, a stayed suspension is not appropriate here.

(Mike Frisch)