Suspended lawyer suspended again for practicing law

Listen to this article

Minnesota attorney Larry Laver held himself out as an attorney while he was suspended from the practice of law. As a result, he was indefinitely suspended again, but the Minnesota Supreme Court was divided over how many months he would need to wait to petition for reinstatement.

Laver, a Woodbury attorney, was admitted to practice in 2002. The director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility filed a petition for discipline in 2023 after Laver apparently committed misconduct in five client matters over the course of more than seven years. A referee found that, in all, Laver violated 19 Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct — nine of them more than once. These rule violations included misrepresentations to clients and courts, client neglect, collection of improper of fees, and advising a client despite a conflict of interest.

Finding that Laver’s conduct was “wide-ranging” and “serious,” the court indefinitely suspended Laver from the practice of law in 2023 with no right to petition for reinstatement for eight months.

While indefinitely suspended, however, Laver apparently held himself out as a lawyer, according to the court ruling. He prepared, signed, and electronically filed legal documents defending or protecting the rights of two companies. Laver confirmed he was the filing attorney in one filing. In other filings, Laver held himself out as authorized to practice law. Additionally, Laver attempted to argue on behalf of these clients at a court hearing and attempted to appear at another hearing.

Laver has entered into a stipulation for discipline. The recommendation of appropriate discipline was a 90-day suspension and the requirement that Laver petition for reinstatement.

“We agree that Laver’s misconduct here is troubling and raises concerns separate from the misconduct that led to his previous suspension—concerns that Laver will have to address prior to being reinstated to the practice of law,” wrote Justice Gordon Moore. “Because he must petition for reinstatement, Laver will be reinstated to the practice of law only if he proves, among other things, that he has undergone moral change.”

Justices did not agree about the scope of the punishment. Justice Anne McKeig, as well as Justice Paul Thissen and Justice Sarah Hennesy, dissented, maintaining that Laver should have been suspended indefinitely with no right to petition for reinstatement for at least six months.

“An additional 90-day suspension in this case is insufficient,” McKeig wrote.

“By continuing to hold himself out as an attorney during his ongoing suspension, Larry J. Laver showed a lack of respect for the legal profession and the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct (MRPC),” McKeig stated. “His flagrant and continued violations of the MRPC while actively suspended demonstrate a troubling indifference to the disciplinary process.”

Laver received three prior admonitions as well. In 2005, he was admonished for communicating with a represented party (MRPC 4.2). Then, in 2006, he was admonished for engaging in conduct that was prejudicial to the administration of justice (8.4(d)). Laver was found to have violated three rules of professional conduct in 2015, involving competence (1.1), communication with clients (1.4(b)), and notification to client when attorney receives client property (1.15(c)(1)).