On Tuesday, May 30, 2o23, the State of Minnesota Supreme Court suspended attorney Alejandro Alfonso Espinosa for failing to cooperate with the Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility disciplinary’s investigations.

The case is entitled “In the Matter of Alejandro Alfonso Espinosa” and was brought by the Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility with case no. A20-1288.

Allegedly, the respondent committed misconduct by neglecting a client matter, failing to communicate with a client’s attorney-in-fact as a representative of the client, failing to obey a court order, failing to respond to a court’s attempts to communicate, and failing to cooperate with the Director’s disciplinary investigations.

On October 14, 2020, the court suspended the respondent, based on evidence that the respondent could not be found in the state to be served with the petition.

The filing states:

“Our order notified the respondent that if he failed to appear in this matter within I year, the allegations in the petition may be deemed admitted. Respondent failed to move this court for a vacation of the order of suspension within the required time.”

The filing continues:

“In her motion, the Director described her efforts to contact the respondent, including making contact with the respondent’s former spouse, who informed the Director that the respondent is very ill and has been diagnosed with dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. The respondent’s former spouse also informed the Director that the respondent has been moved to hospice care, no longer practices law, and does not intend to practice law again due to his severe illness and diagnosis. Finally, the respondent’s former spouse shared her belief that the respondent should be placed on disability status. However, the Director has been unable to obtain confirmation of these facts, either directly from the respondent or from someone authorized by law to speak on his behalf. The Director has likewise been unable to obtain medical records that would confirm these facts.”

According to the court, based on the aforementioned facts, if the respondent’s circumstances are as represented, cooperation by the respondent or his guardian or another authorized representative may have led to an appropriate stipulation. However, the court noted that it has never placed an attorney on disability status without a factual finding, stipulation, or court order indicating that the attorney’s physical condition, mental illness, mental deficiency, senility, or habitual and excessive use of intoxicating liquors, narcotics, or other drugs prevents the lawyer from competently representing a client.

Under the circumstances of the case, where the allegations of the petition were deemed admitted and the respondent has never made an appearance, the court believes it is appropriate to impose an indefinite suspension without an identified duration.

The Disposition states:

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: Respondent Alejandro Alfonso Espinosa is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law, effective as of the date of this order.”

Mr. Espinosa practices in St. Paul, Minnesota. He is licensed in Minnesota. His info can be found on Linkedin.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.