In re Disciplinary Action Against Swokowski
796 N.W.2d 317
Minn.2011Background
- Director seeks disciplinary action against Minnesota lawyer Jay Gerard Swokowski for alleged misconduct including forgery, misappropriation of client funds, failure to notify suspension, neglect, failure to pay a law-related judgment, and failure to cooperate with the investigation.
- Swokowski did not respond to the petition; the court granted summary relief deeming the allegations admitted and ordered him to show cause for disbarment.
- Swokowski was admitted to practice in 1989 and was previously suspended for 90 days in 2009 for improper trust-account handling, communication lapses, and failure to retain clients’ funds; he never reapplied for reinstatement.
- The admitted facts detail specific clients: J.F. (forgery and misappropriation), C.W., P.F., L.A., R.C., C.B., J.M., M.H. (pattern of neglect, poor communication, return of property issues), and J.F. again for communication failures.
- Count Four involves nonpayment of a law-related judgment after court reporting services were provided, resulting in a judgment against Swokowski.
- Count Five concerns Swokowski’s failure to cooperate with the Director’s investigation by not responding to notices at various addresses, despite Rule 26 RLPR requirements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Forgery and misappropriation violated MRPC 8.4 | Swokowski forged J.F.’s signature and misappropriated funds. | Not stated in the record. | Yes; violated 8.4(b) and (c) (and 8.4(d)). |
| Failure to notify clients of suspension violated Rule 26 RLPR and MRPC 3.4(c) | Swokowski did not notify clients or submit required affidavit. | Not stated in the record. | Yes; violated Rule 26 and, by extension, 3.4(c). |
| Pattern of neglect, poor communication, and failure to return client property violated MRPC 1.3, 1.4, and 1.16(d) | Multiple clients experienced neglect, lack of communication, and mismanaged or unreclaimed property. | Not stated in the record. | Yes; violated 1.3, 1.4(a)-(b), and 1.16(d). |
| Failure to pay a law-related judgment violated MRPC 8.4(d) | Swokowski failed to pay court reporting services and judgments. | Not stated in the record. | Yes; violated 8.4(d). |
| Failure to cooperate in the Director’s investigation violated MRPC 8.1(b) and RLPR 25 | Swokowski did not respond to investigation notices at multiple addresses. | Not stated in the record. | Yes; violated 8.1(b) and RLPR 25. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Garcia, 792 N.W.2d 434 (Minn. 2010) (guides applying aggravating factors when determining sanction)
- In re Grigsby, 764 N.W.2d 54 (Minn. 2009) (case on sanctioning discipline framework)
- In re Brooks, 696 N.W.2d 84 (Minn. 2005) (case-law on case-by-case sanctioning with aggravating factors)
- In re Redburn, 746 N.W.2d 330 (Minn. 2008) (rule 3.4(c) violation when ordered to comply with Rule 26)
- In re De Rycke, 707 N.W.2d 370 (Minn. 2006) (rebukes for patterns of misconduct contributing to discipline)
- In re Fett, 790 N.W.2d 840 (Minn. 2010) (trust accounting and client communications harms to profession)
- In re Neill, 486 N.W.2d 150 (Minn. 1992) (failure to cooperate as ground for discipline)
- In re Stanbury, 561 N.W.2d 507 (Minn. 1997) (deference to professional debt and discipline implications)
- In re Ruttger, 566 N.W.2d 327 (Minn. 1997) (misappropriation harms public and profession)
- In re Randall, 562 N.W.2d 679 (Minn. 1997) (consideration of client harm and delay in discipline analysis)
- In re Berg, 741 N.W.2d 600 (Minn. 2007) (forgery reflects dishonesty and is serious misconduct)
- In re Coleman, 793 N.W.2d 296 (Minn. 2011) (assessment of harm to public and profession)