Cited by

When determining appropriate discipline, “[c]oncepts of fairness dictate that consistency in the 10 imposition of sanctions be an important goal,” but we recognize that each case has “its own unique factual circumstances.”

When determining appropriate discipline, “[c]oncepts of fairness dictate that consistency in the imposition of sanctions be an important goal,” but we recognize that each case has “its own unique factual circumstances.”

We observed that in we affirmed the referee’s rejection of a psychological disorder as a mitigating factor based on the finding that the disorder was not “a severe problem on a recognized psychological diagnostic scale and did not result in impairment of [Pyles’] cognitive functions, his ability to direct his actions, or to

See, -73 (Minn.2006) (18-month suspension); (indefinite suspension, at least two years before reinstatement-eligible).

Brehmer’s misconduct is not as egregious as the misconduct in Hanvik or the misconduct in -24 (1988).

See, (no disbarment where attorney’s extensive pro bono work had a detrimental effect on his financial situation); , 15 (Minn.1984) (attorney’s extensive pro bono work indicated an otherwise ethical practice and the misappropriation of client funds was an isolated incident).

We disagree and choose to follow our decision in where we affirmed the referee’s rejection of a psychological mitigation claim because the respondent’s “disorder [was] not a ‘severe’ problem on a recognized psychological diagnostic scale and ‘did not result in impairment of respondent’s cognitive functions, his ability to direct his actions, or to know

Therefore, while the referee’s findings of fact are not conclusive, Rule 14(e), Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility, they are accorded great deference, and “will not be set aside unless clearly erroneous.” ().

Respondent is correct that the standard of proof for attorney discipline cases is “clear and convincing evidence,” but the standard of review for attorney discipline cases is to uphold the referee’s factual findings if they are not clearly erroneous, or if they are supported by the evidence.

(attorney’s whole life indicated care and concern for those less privileged, extensive pro bono work performed had a deleterious effect on both his professional and family finances); , 15 (Minn.1984) (attorney performed significant pro bono work, single misappropriation

See, (exemplary private life combined with psychological disorder); (good character, isolated instance of misappropriation of small amount of money, full restitution).