In re Disciplinary Action Against Ulanowski, 834 N.W.2d 697

Respondent Lawrence W. Ulanowski, admitted 2001, had an extensive disciplinary history including four admonitions and an August 3, 2011 indefinite suspension (no reinstatement petition for at least one year).
Two clients (S.M.K. and F.P.) paid retainers for bankruptcy work totaling $1,449 and $800 respectively; respondent performed no legal work for either client and did not refund unearned fees.
After respondent’s suspension he sent letters telling clients to retrieve files and seek refunds, but thereafter ignored repeated client communications seeking refunds and file retrieval.
F.P. sued in conciliation court and obtained a $875 judgment; respondent failed to appear and has not paid that judgment.
The Director served notices of investigation regarding both clients; multiple requests were returned unclaimed or refused and respondent did not respond or file an answer to the disciplinary petition, so the petition’s allegations were deemed admitted.
Based on the admitted facts, the court found misappropriation (failure to return unearned funds), failures to communicate, failure to satisfy a law-related judgment, and refusal to cooperate with disciplinary authorities, and ordered disbarment, notice obligations, and $900 in costs.

Issue	Director's Argument	Ulanowski's Argument	Held
Whether respondent failed to refund unearned client funds (misappropriation)	Funds were paid as retainers, no work was performed, respondent never returned funds — conduct tantamount to misappropriation	No answer filed; no defense presented	Admitted facts support misappropriation; violated MRPC 1.15(c)(4) and 1.16(d); disbarment warranted
Whether respondent failed to communicate with client S.M.K.	Repeated client attempts to contact respondent went unanswered	No answer filed	Violated MRPC 1.4(a)(4); failure to communicate established
Whether respondent must satisfy the $875 conciliation-court judgment	Judgment remains unpaid after respondent failed to appear; nonpayment prejudicial to administration of justice	No answer filed	Failure to pay violated MRPC 8.4(d); aggravating factor in sanctioning
Whether respondent refused to cooperate with Director’s investigation	Notices and follow-ups were sent to respondent and returned unclaimed/refused; no response	No answer filed; no cooperation	Violated MRPC 8.1(b) and RLPR Rule 25; noncooperation aggravated sanctioning

In re Ulanowski, 800 N.W.2d 785 (Minn. 2011) (previous discipline and suspension of respondent)
In re Lundeen, 811 N.W.2d 602 (Minn. 2012) (holding that no work performed and no refund can constitute misappropriation when respondent fails to cooperate)
In re Voss, 830 N.W.2d 867 (Minn. 2013) (applying Lundeen in misappropriation/cooperation context)
In re Brooks, 696 N.W.2d 84 (Minn. 2005) (definition and seriousness of misappropriation of client funds)
In re Garcia, 792 N.W.2d 434 (Minn. 2010) (misappropriation typically warrants disbarment absent substantial mitigation)
In re Swokowski, 796 N.W.2d 317 (Minn. 2011) (disbarment for misappropriation plus additional misconduct, and consideration of law-related debt)
In re Redburn, 746 N.W.2d 330 (Minn. 2008) (misconduct while suspended and failures that erode public confidence)
In re Ruttger, 566 N.W.2d 327 (Minn. 1997) (misappropriation harms public and profession)
In re Rooney, 709 N.W.2d 263 (Minn. 2006) (breach of fiduciary trust and its effect on public confidence)
In re Grzybek, 567 N.W.2d 259 (Minn. 1997) (disbarment possible for relatively small misappropriations when combined with other misconduct)