On Wednesday, January 17, 2024, the Minnesota Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility filed a petition for disciplinary action against Attorney Kevin K. Shoeberg.
The case is entitled “In the Matter of Kevin K. Shoeberg.”
The charges cited Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct 1.3, 3.2, 1.4(a)(3)(b), 1.4(a)(4), 4.1, 8.4(c), 1.1, and 3.4(d).
According to the petition filed in the Supreme Court of Minnesota, Shoeberg committed multiple violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct in his representation of two clients. The petition outlines Shoeberg’s misconduct related to his representation of client J.C. beginning in October 2020. Shoeberg was retained by J.C.’s guardian, Gregory Owens, to obtain the release of $6,605 in escrow funds from a title company. However, over the next 11 months, Shoeberg failed to take any meaningful action on the case. He did not notify Owens when the underlying lawsuit was dismissed, did not respond to Owens’ numerous requests for status updates, and repeatedly misrepresented the status of the case to Owens. On multiple occasions, Shoeberg falsely claimed to have scheduled court hearings or submitted filings to the court when he had taken no action. Due to Shoeberg’s delays and misrepresentations, it took significantly longer for J.C. to qualify for medical assistance.
The petition also details Shoeberg’s misconduct in a landlord-tenant matter involving Jomari Alexander and S.S. Shoeberg represented S.S. and filed an answer including counterclaims. However, he then refused to respond to Alexander’s discovery requests or seek a protective order. At a hearing on Alexander’s motion to compel, Shoeberg falsely claimed to have a motion to dismiss prepared. The court sanctioned S.S. for the discovery violations after excluding evidence at trial that had not been disclosed.
The petition alleges Shoeberg violated multiple Rules of Professional Conduct, including rules requiring competent representation, diligence, communication with clients, candor toward others, and compliance with discovery obligations.
Shoeberg stipulated to dispensing with a disciplinary hearing panel. In the stipulation, Shoeberg agreed the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility could directly file the petition with the Supreme Court. While Shoeberg did not admit to the allegations, he acknowledged the right to contest them before the Court. The Supreme Court will now consider the petition and determine appropriate discipline for Shoeberg’s alleged misconduct.
The Petition states:
“WHEREFORE, the Director respectfully prays for an order of this Court imposing appropriate discipline, awarding costs and disbursements pursuant to the Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility, and for such other, further or different relief as may be just and proper.”
According to avvo.com, Mr. Shoeberg is a discrimination attorney in Woodbury, Minnesota. He attended the University of Minnesota Law School, graduating in 1989. He acquired his law license in Minnesota in the same year.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
