In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Roland James Theiler, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0196101.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MINNESOTA IN SUPREME COURT December 8, 2015 O mlCEOF APPB.IAIECCIUt'liS A14-0889 In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Roland Jame~ Theiler, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0 196101. ORDER The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility filed a petition for disciplinary action, alleging that respondent Roland James Theiler committed the following professional misconduct. He failed to communicate with clients; held out a nonlawyer paralegal as a lawyer; failed to cooperate in disciplinary investigations; and used a misleading law firm name. See Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.4(a)(3), 1.4(a)(4), 5.3(a), 5.3(b), 5.3(c)(2), 5.5(b), 7.l(a), 7.5, 8.l(b); Rule 25, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibiliry (RLPR). On June 26, 2014, we suspended respondent pursuant to Rule 12(cXI), RLPR, after he could not be found in the state and the Director was unable to personally serve him with the petition for disciplinary a~tion. In re Theiler, 848 N.W.2d 236, 237 (Minn. 2014) (order). We provided that respondent had 1 year to file a motion to vacate the suspension order and for leave to answer the petition for disciplinary action and that failure to appear in this matter within 1 year would result in the allegations of the petition for disciplinary action being deemed admitted. ld. 1 On July 31, 2015, we deemed the allegations in the petition admitted after respondent failed to file a motion to vacate the suspension order. In re Theiler, No. A140889, Order at 1-2 (Minn. filed July 31, 2015). We provided that respondent could file a memorandum showing cause why the court should not discipline him. /d. at 2. We also invited the parties to submit written proposals regarding the appropriate discipline to be imposed. Id Respondent did not file a memorandum in response to the order to show cause. He also did not file a written proposal regarding the appropriate discipline. The Director asks the court to impose an indefinite suspension with the right to petition for reinstatement after 90 days. Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. Respondent Roland James Theiler is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law, with no right to petition for reinstatement until 90 days after the date of the filing of this order. 2. Respondent shall comply with Rule 26, RLPR (requiring notice of suspension to clients, opposing counsel, and tribunals), and shall pay $900 in costs pursuant to Rule 24, RLPR. 3. RLPR. Respondent may petition for reinstatement pursuant to Rule 18(a)-(d), Reinstatement is conditioned on successful completion of the professional responsibility portion of the state bar examination and satisfaction of continuing legal education requirements pursuant to Rule 18(e), RLPR. 2 Dated: December 8, 2015 BY THE COURT: Dav aR. Stras Associate Justice 3
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.
