In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against John Canfield Lillie, III, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 286850.

Annotate this Case
In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against John Canfield Lillie, III, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 286850. A05-2436, Supreme Court Order, January 5, 2006.

STATE OF MINNESOTA

 

IN SUPREME COURT

 

A05-2436

 

 

In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against

John Canfield Lillie, III, a Minnesota Attorney,

Registration No. 286850.

 

 

O R D E R

 

 

            The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility has filed a petition for disciplinary action alleging that respondent John Canfield Lillie, III, committed professional misconduct warranting public discipline, namely, misuse of legal correspondence in order to evade Department of Corrections rules, in violation of Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(c) (and (d). 

            Respondent admits his conduct violated the Rules of Professional Conduct, waives his rights under Rule 14, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR), and has entered into a stipulation with the Director in which they jointly recommend that the appropriate discipline is public reprimand and payment of $900 in costs and disbursements pursuant to Rule 24, RLPR.

            This court has independently reviewed the file and approves the jointly recommended disposition.

            Based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein,

            IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that respondent John Canfield Lillie, III, is publicly reprimanded and that he shall pay $900 in costs pursuant to Rule 24, RLPR.

            Dated:  December 29, 2005

                                                                                    BY THE COURT:

 

                                                                                        /s/                                                         

           

                                                                                    Russell A. Anderson

                                                                                    Associate Justice

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.