Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 481.071 (2026)

Misconduct By Attorneys

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Every attorney or counselor at law who shall be guilty of any deceit or collusion, or shall consent thereto, with intent to deceive the court or any party, or who shall delay the attorney's client's suit with a view to the attorney's own gain, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, in addition to the punishment prescribed by law therefor, shall forfeit to the party injured treble damages, to be recovered in a civil action.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 13 cases, 1984–2013 · leading case: Baker v. Ploetz, 616 N.W.2d 263 (Minn. 2000).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Baker v. Ploetz, 616 N.W.2d 263 (Minn. 2000). · cites it 146× “We begin our analysis by noting that the language of Minn.Stat. § 481.071 is not as clear as the language in section 481.”

Rucker v. Schmidt, 794 N.W.2d 114 (Minn. 2011). · cites it 2× “Every attorney or counselor at law who shall be guilty of any deceit or collusion, or shall consent thereto, with intent to deceive the court or any party, or who shall delay the attorney's client’s suit with a view to the attorney’s own gain, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor…”

Gillespie v. Klun, 406 N.W.2d 547 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 6× “Respondents also sought treble damages for willful disregard of their rights under Minn.Stat. § 481.071 (1984), alleging collusion between appellant and the Riikolas.”

Hemmingsen v. Messerli & Kramer, P.A., 674 F.3d 814 (8th Cir. 2012). “The Complaint also asserted state law claims for malicious prosecution, abuse of process, and the recovery of treble damages for attorney deceit un *816 der Minn.Stat. § 481.071. Ms. Hemming-sen appeals the district court’s 1 grant of summary judgment dismissing these claims.”

State v. Casby, 348 N.W.2d 736 (Minn. 1984). · cites it 4× “Casby for attorney misconduct in violation of Minn.Stat. § 481.071 (1982). 1 On June 15, 1980, Peter Spedevick, who was driving after revocation of his driver’s license, was arrested for speeding and littering (he had thrown a beer bottle and cigarette pack out of his car while…”

Baker v. Ploetz, 597 N.W.2d 347 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 4× “” Minn.Stat. § 481.071 (1998). These two sections, which are virtually identical, apply when an attorney has intentionally participated in deceit or collusion.”

State v. Serstock, 390 N.W.2d 399 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 4× “In a somewhat analogous situation, the Minnesota Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a private attorney for attorney misconduct under Minn.Stat. § 481.071 (1982) for her participation in a client's deception of the court.”

Ness v. Gurstel Chargo, P.A., 933 F. Supp. 2d 1156 (D. Minnesota 2013). “07 and § 481.071, Defendants Gurstel Chargo, Gurstel, and Chargo are liable for treble the amount of the default judgments entered against Ness, Xiong, Peters, and the class.”

In Re MacK, 519 N.W.2d 900 (Minn. 1994). · cites it 2× “Similar conduct was held to justify criminal conviction of violation of Minn.Stat. § 481.071 (1993) despite the lawyer's argument that her duty to the client prevented the disclosure of his deception: When she learned her client was perpetrating a fraud on the judicial system,…”

Mullins v. Churchill, 616 N.W.2d 764 (Minn. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “10 is virtually identical to language in the attorney-misconduct statute, Minn.Stat. § 481.071 (1998), which states: Every attorney * * * who shall be guilty of any deceit or collusion, or shall consent thereto, with intent to deceive the court or any party, or who shall delay…”

Simms v. Seaman, 23 A.3d 1 (Conn. App. Ct. 2011). “10113 (2001); Minn. Stat. Ann. § 481.071 (2002); N.M. Stat.”

In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Mack, 519 N.W.2d 900 (Minn. 1994). · cites it 2× “Similar conduct was held to justify criminal conviction of violation of Minn.Stat. § 481.071 (1993) despite the lawyer’s argument that her duty to the client prevented the disclosure of his deception: When she learned her client was perpetrating a fraud on the judicial system,…”

Show all 13 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.