Preview:

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN SUPREME COURT A09-1861

Original Jurisdiction

Per Curiam

In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Dennis R. Letourneau, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 62443

Filed: January 5, 2011 Office of Appellate Courts

________________________ Martin A. Cole, Director, Patrick R. Burns, First Assistant Director, Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility, St. Paul, Minnesota, for petitioner. Edward F. Kautzer, Ruvelson & Kautzer, Chartered, St. Paul, Minnesota, for respondent. ________________________ SYLLABUS Indefinite suspension with no right to petition for reinstatement for a minimum of one year is the appropriate discipline when a lawyer neglects a client matter by failing to timely serve a potential defendant until after the statute of limitations had expired; failing to timely respond to discovery requests or file responsive pleadings; failing to pursue alternative dispute resolution proceedings; not adequately communicating with his clients; agreeing to forego certain claims without consulting his clients; and not cooperating in a timely manner with the Directors investigation of the complaint.

1

OPINION PER CURIAM. The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility (OLPR) served and filed a petition for discipline in September 2009 alleging that Dennis R. Letourneau neglected a client matter, did not adequately communicate with his clients, did not obtain his clients approval before agreeing to forego certain claims, and failed to cooperate with the Directors office in its investigation of the complaint against him. Following a hearing, a referee appointed pursuant to Rule 14, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR), concluded that Letourneau had committed the violations as alleged and recommended that Letourneau be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law with no eligibility to apply for reinstatement for one year. We conclude that the referees findings are not clearly erroneous and suspend Letourneau from the practice of law with no right to petition for reinstatement for a minimum of one year. Letourneau was admitted to the practice of law in Minnesota in 1970. He

practices primarily in personal injury matters. Letourneau has three previous disciplinary incidents. In 2001, he was admonished for providing financial assistance to a client, failing to cooperate with a disciplinary investigation, and practicing law while suspended for nonpayment of the attorney registration fee. In 2003, Letourneau was placed on twoyear private probation for making a loan to a client and failing to cooperate with a disciplinary investigation. In 2006, we publicly reprimanded Letourneau and placed him on one year of supervised probation for neglecting a client matter and failing to keep his client informed about her matter. See In re Letourneau, 712 N.W.2d 183 (Minn. 2006). 2

On February 20, 1999, Frederick and Carol Ennenga retained Letourneau to pursue claims against a Kmart pharmacy for making a mistake in filling a prescription. In December 1998, the pharmacy filled Frederick Ennengas prescription with a blood thinner instead of his prescribed blood pressure medication. As a result of taking the incorrect medication, on February 6, 1999, Ennenga suffered a ruptured aneurysm requiring surgery and four to five weeks of hospitalization. Ennenga lost kidney function and three of his toes were amputated. Letourneau took no formal legal action until February 6, 2003, the last day allowed by the four-year statute of limitations.1 Letourneau commenced an action in Hennepin County District Court by serving Kmart Corporation, Kmart Pharmacies of Minnesota, and employees Heidi Scheppmann and Mary Geronime with a summons and complaint. The complaint also named the

pharmacist on duty, Elizabeth Geer, as a defendant, but she was not served until February 9, 2005, after the four-year health-care provider and six-year personal injury statutes of limitations had both expired. By the time Letourneau filed suit, Kmart had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.2 As a result of the bankruptcy, all attempts to collect on debts arising before January 22,

1

"An action by a patient or former patient against a health care provider alleging malpractice, error, mistake, or failure to cure, whether based on a contract or tort, must be commenced within four years from the date the cause of action accrued." Minn. Stat.

Download A09-1861, In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Dennis R. Letourneau, a

Minnesota Law