In re Disciplinary Action Against Glasser, 831 N.W.2d 644

Glasser, Minnesota-licensed since 1997, was convicted on two misdemeanor counts of theft by swindle arising from unauthorized charges on her deceased father's credit card.
A district court sentenced concurrent 90 days in jail and stayed the sentences for one year conditioned on no similar conduct.
Director filed a petition alleging violation of Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(b) based on these convictions.
The referee recommended a public reprimand and five years of supervised probation; Director sought 18-month suspension.
Glasser admitted the violation and presented mitigation evidence focusing on extreme personal stress and alcoholism in remission.
The Supreme Court suspended Glasser for at least 30 days with five years of supervised probation and imposed detailed probation conditions after reinstatement.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the referee properly mitigated based on self-reporting, discipline history, and remorse.	Glasser self-reported misconduct and had no prior discipline.	Glasser did not self-report; lack of prior discipline is not truly mitigating.	Misuse of mitigation findings; self-reporting and lack of prior discipline were misapplied; consider remorse.
What is the appropriate discipline given the two dishonest-conduct misdemeanors and extreme personal stress?	Director seeks 18-month suspension as appropriate discipline.	Referee's public reprimand with five years’ probation too lenient given misconduct.	Suspension for at least 30 days with five years of supervised probation on reinstatement.
Should alcoholism and extreme personal stress be considered mitigating factors under Weyhrich/Fairbairn lines?	Alcoholism and stress are significant mitigating factors.	Alcoholism did not cause misconduct per Weyhrich factors; evidence insufficient for causation.	Extreme personal stress, with alcoholism contributing to life circumstances, supports mitigation.

In re Morris, 796 N.W.2d 152 (Minn. 2011) (public discipline for misdemeanor theft-related misconduct)
In re Ingebritson, 741 N.W.2d 397 (Minn. 2007) (public reprimand and unsupervised probation for misconduct)
In re Dvorak, 554 N.W.2d 399 (Minn. 1996) (public reprimand for fraudulent tax-return-related conduct)
In re Prescott, 271 N.W.2d 822 (Minn. 1978) (stayed suspension for false information in loan application)
In re Mayne, 783 N.W.2d 153 (Minn. 2010) (disbarment for felony financial exploitation (distinguishable on facts))
In re Crosby, 577 N.W.2d 711 (Minn. 1998) (suspension for theft by swindle in a stipulation case (distinguishable))
In re Lundeen, 811 N.W.2d 602 (Minn. 2012) (framework for considering factors in discipline: nature, weight, harm, aggravation/mitigation)
In re Rooney, 709 N.W.2d 263 (Minn. 2006) (extreme personal stress as mitigating factor when misconduct occurred)
In re Fairbairn, 802 N.W.2d 734 (Minn. 2011) (discusses limiting Weyhrich factors and recognizing extreme stress as mitigation)
In re Albrecht, 779 N.W.2d 530 (Minn. 2010) (remorse and mitigating factors; standard for evaluating mitigation evidence)
In re Weyhrich, 339 N.W.2d 274 (Minn. 1983) (origin of Weyhrich factors for alcoholism-related mitigation)