In re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Bradley J. Haddy

Summary

The Minnesota Supreme Court reviews disciplinary proceedings against attorney Bradley J. Haddy. The court upholds the referee’s findings that Haddy misappropriated client funds, neglected multiple client matters, failed to follow a client’s decision, and initially failed to cooperate with disciplinary investigations. The court concludes that disbarment is the appropriate discipline; the provided text ends during the court’s disciplinary analysis.

Holdings

1. The referee's findings and conclusions regarding the M.B., S.Z., and R.R. matters were supported by the record and were not clearly erroneous.
2. Haddy violated Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct 1.15(a), 1.15(c)(5), 1.16(d), 1.3, 1.4(a)(4), 3.2, 8.4(c), and 8.4(d) in the M.B. matter.
3. Haddy violated Rule 1.2(a) by failing to abide by S.Z.'s repeated decisions concerning the objective of obtaining authorization to change the child's school.
4. Disbarment was the appropriate discipline for Haddy's intentional misappropriation of client funds, pattern of client neglect, initial failure to cooperate with the disciplinary investigation, prior discipline, substantial experience, and lack of remorse.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the referee's findings and conclusions concerning misconduct in the M.B., S.Z., and R.R. matters were clearly erroneous.
2. Whether Haddy's misconduct constituted misappropriation of client funds, a pattern of client neglect, and failure to cooperate with the disciplinary investigation.
3. What discipline was appropriate in light of the nature and cumulative weight of the misconduct, harm to clients and the legal profession, aggravating factors, mitigating factors, and comparable disciplinary cases.

Disposition

other