Cited by

With respect to prior discipline, we have repeatedly held that “an attorney’s lack of prior disciplinary history is not a mitigating factor, but instead constitutes the absence of an aggravating factor.” Fai rbairn, d at 746

Although discipline is ultimately determined “based on the unique facts and circumstances” of the case, we will look to previous decisions for guidance “in enforcing consistent discipline.”

While “we place great weight on the referee’s recommended discipline, we retain ultimate responsibility for determining the appropriate sanction.”

6 We afford “great weight” to the referee’s recomméndation, but our court retains “ultimate responsibility for determining the appropriate sanction.”

The purpose of disciplinary sanctions for professional misconduct is “not to punish the attorney but rather to protect the public, to protect the judicial system, and to deter future misconduct by the disciplined attorney as well as by other attorneys.” (citations omitted).

(“[S]ub-stantial experience as a lawyer may constitute an aggravating factor.”).

Rather, its purpose is “to protect the public, protect the judicial system, and to deter future misconduct by the disciplined attorney as well as by other attorneys.”

While “prior decisions guide and aid us in enforcing consistent discipline,” sanctions are ultimately determined “based on the unique facts of each case.” Ulanowski, d at 799 .

(holding findings and conclusions were conclusive after lawyer withdrew objections prior to oral argument).

(“[Substantial experience as a lawyer may constitute an aggravating factor.”); -37 (Minn.2010).