In Re Disciplinary Action Against Pitzele
In Re Disciplinary Action Against Pitzele, 740 N.W.2d 355 (Minn. 2007).
Cited by
- State of Minnesota v. Ava Thadette Smith Minn. Ct. App. 2024
- State of Minnesota v. Samuel Alejondro Torrez Minn. Ct. App. 2024
- Jesse Lee Helget (A20-1036) v. Commissioner of Public Safety, State of Minnesota, vs. Jesse … Minn. Ct. App. 2023
- State of Minnesota v. Thomas Lenard Hunter Minn. Ct. App. 2022
- State of Minnesota v. Tonia Nicole Williams Minn. Ct. App. 2021
- Jeffrey Paul Nieland v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2018
- State of Minnesota v. Neil Ray Lystad Minn. Ct. App. 2017
- State of Minnesota v. Joel Patrick Rodriguez 889 N.W.2d 332 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
- State of Minnesota v. Johnathan Bernard Edwards Minn. Ct. App. 2016
- State of Minnesota v. Cory Allen Wuollet Minn. Ct. App. 2015
- David Charles Widmer, et al v. Dallas Jacob Albertson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
- State of Minnesota v. Daniel Gary Mason Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- State v. Ouellette 740 N.W.2d 355
Opinion text
ORDER The Director has filed a petition and supplementary petition for disciplinary action alleging that respondent Mark David-Pitzele committed professional misconduct warranting public discipline, namely, misappropriation of client funds, failure to timely file state and federal quarterly employee withholding returns, failure to timely pay state and federal employer withholding taxes, and failure to maintain required trust account books and records, in violation of Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(c) and (d) and 1.15. Respondent has withdrawn his answer to the petition for disciplinary action, admitted the allegations of the petition and supplementary petition, waived his procedural rights under Rule 14, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR), and entered into a stipulation with the Director under which the parties jointly recommend that the appropriate sanction is disbarment. The court has independently reviewed the file and approves the jointly recommended disposition. Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that respondent Mark David Pitzele is disbarred effective as of the date of filing of this order. Respondent shall comply with Rule 26, RLPR (requiring notice of disbarment to clients, opposing counsel, and tribunals) and shall pay $900 in costs pursuant to Rule 24, RLPR. BY THE COURT: /s/ Helen M. Meyer Associate Justice