LAWYER DISCIPLINE
In the Matter of Reciprocal Discipline of Steven T. Rosso,
a Person Previously Admitted to the Bar of the State of North
Dakota No. 20190191
The Minnesota Supreme Court filed an order suspending Steven T.
Rosso for failing to safeguard client funds; failing to ensure accurate
maintenance of the required trust account books and records; failing to
review the activity in the pooled and individual client trust accounts or
any of the reports generated for those accounts; failing to adequately
supervise non-lawyer staff in the handling of client funds, which
resulted in the misappropriation of client funds; failing to promptly
disburse funds to clients; negligent misappropriation of client funds;
and accepting an improper personal loan from a client. Rosso is not
currently licensed in North Dakota. Rosso was notified a certified
copy of an order was received and he had 30 days to file any claim
that imposition of the identical discipline in North Dakota would be
unwarranted and the reasons for the claim. No response was received.
The North Dakota Supreme Court suspended Rosso for 12 months,
effective upon entry of judgment. Reinstatement is conditional upon
on successful completion of the Multistate Professional Responsibility
Examination and compliance with continuing legal education
requirements.
In the Matter of the Application for Disciplinary Action Against
Patti J. Jensen, a Member of the Bar of the State of North Dakota
Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of North
Dakota, Petitioner v. Patti J. Jensen, Respondent No. 6317-NE-1810
A hearing panel of the Disciplinary Board, Disciplinary Counsel, and
Patti J. Jensen agreed that she be reprimanded. Jensen represented a
client regarding a family law matter. In the initial client meeting, the
client referenced the opposing party had met with counsel. Jensen
filed documents including an ex parte interim order. She served the
34
THE GAVEL
opposing party, did not serve opposing counsel, and did not notify
the court the opposing party was represented. The court granted
the interim order without a hearing. The petition for discipline
alleged violation of N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 3.3(d), candor to the
tribunal; 3.4(c), fairness to opposing party and counsel; and 4.2,
communication with persons represented by counsel. Jensen admitted
the material facts were true and that the charges could not be
successfully defended. The hearing panel, Disciplinary Counsel, and
Jensen agreed she be reprimanded for her misconduct and pay
$250 in costs and expenses of the proceeding.
In the Matter of the Application for Disciplinary Action Against
Anna Marie Emma Stenson, a Member of the Bar of the State of
North Dakota
Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of North
Dakota, Petitioner v. Anna Marie Emma Stenson, Respondent
No. 6302-SE-1808
A hearing panel of the Disciplinary Board, Disciplinary Counsel,
and Anna Marie Emma Stenson agreed that she be reprimanded for
violating N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.3, diligence; 1.4, communication;
and 1.16(e), declining or terminating representation. Stenson
represented clients in an immigration matter. Stenson agreed that
she failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness, failed to
consult with clients about how their means were to be accomplished,
failed to keep clients reasonably informed, failed to comply with
clients’ reasonable requests for information, failed to explain to the
extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed
decisions, and failed to take reasonable steps to protect the clients’
interest upon termination of representation. After considering
the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, the hearing panel,
Disciplinary Counsel, and Stenson agreed she be reprimanded for her
misconduct and pay $250 in costs and expenses of the proceeding.