In re Eichhorn-Hicks, 916 N.W.2d 32

Tracy R. Eichhorn-Hicks, admitted 1975, primarily a criminal practitioner, with eight prior disciplinary matters including suspensions and reprimands for similar misconduct.
Three client matters (2014–2016) prompted discipline: (1) flat $10,000 fee agreement that omitted a refund clause; (2) failure to communicate a prosecution plea offer to client C.S.-A.; (3) signing client D.V.’s name and signing himself as witness on a medical-records release form and presenting it to jail personnel.
Referee found violations of Minn. R. Prof. Conduct: 1.5(b) (fee agreement omission), 1.1/1.2(a)/1.3/1.4(a)(1)–(3) (failure to communicate plea), and 8.4(c)–(d) (dishonesty re: medical-release form).
Eichhorn-Hicks contested findings on the plea-communication and the medical-release signature and argued reinstatement petition should not be required; the Director urged adoption of referee recommendations.
Court upheld referee findings: failure to communicate the plea offer and dishonest signing of the medical-release form were not clearly erroneous; omission in the fee agreement was uncontested.
Court imposed an indefinite suspension effective in 14 days with no right to petition for reinstatement for 120 days, conditions for reinstatement (including the MPRE-level professional-responsibility exam), and one year probation if reinstated.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
1. Omission of refund clause in flat-fee agreement (Rule 1.5(b))	Director: omission violated Rule 1.5(b)	Eichhorn-Hicks did not dispute referee’s finding	Held: violation affirmed (uncontested)
2. Failure to communicate prosecution plea offer (Rules 1.1, 1.2(a), 1.3, 1.4)	Director: Eichhorn-Hicks failed to provide/communicate written plea offer to C.S.-A.	Eichhorn-Hicks: he discussed the offer; client’s testimony unreliable	Held: referee’s credibility findings upheld; violation affirmed
3. Signing client’s name and witnessing it on medical-release form (Rule 8.4(c),(d))	Director: signing client’s name and falsely witnessing was dishonest conduct	Eichhorn-Hicks: claimed he acted as attorney-in-fact or no harm occurred	Held: conduct was misleading/dishonest; violation affirmed
4. Appropriate discipline; petition for reinstatement requirement	Director: adopt referee’s recommended discipline (60 days + petition)	Eichhorn-Hicks: no reinstatement petition should be required for short suspension	Held: aggravation (recidivism, experience, lack of remorse) warrants greater discipline — indefinite suspension with no petition for 120 days; conditions for reinstatement and probation if reinstated

In re Greenman, 860 N.W.2d 368 (Minn. 2015) (deference to referee’s findings)
In re Walsh, 872 N.W.2d 741 (Minn. 2015) (deferring to referee on credibility)
In re Tigue, 900 N.W.2d 424 (Minn. 2017) (consideration of aggravating/mitigating factors and prior discipline)
In re Glasser, 831 N.W.2d 644 (Minn. 2013) (dishonesty seriously harms public confidence)
In re Ulanowski, 800 N.W.2d 785 (Minn. 2011) (lengthy suspension for failure to communicate plea offer)
In re De Rycke, 707 N.W.2d 370 (Minn. 2006) (failure to inform client of plea offer violates Rule 1.3 and 1.4)
In re Arbeiter, 764 N.W.2d 814 (Minn. 2009) (signing client’s name on medical-release form violates Rule 8.4)
In re Aitken, 787 N.W.2d 152 (Minn. 2010) (lengthy suspensions for misrepresenting signatures/documents)