Category Michelle MacDonald

Federal civil rights lawsuit filed by MacDonald dismissed

September 15, 2017 Comments Off read Analysis, Legal Developments, Michelle MacDonald

A federal civil rights lawsuit filed by Michelle MacDonald in March 2015 against Dakota County stemming from her arrest while representing Sandra Grazzini-Rucki in a family court hearing has been dismissed.

It was during the custody hearing involving Grazzini-Rucki and her ex-husband, David Rucki, on September 12, 2013, that MacDonald took pictures in the courtroom which led to her being arrested.

MacDonald spent a portion of the trial representing Grazzini-Rucki while confined to a wheelchair after her own refusal to walk back into the courtroom. MacDonald also refused to put on her shoes and glasses, or provide her legal name and address to law enforcement.

The Memorandum Opinion and Order Granting Defendants’ Summary Judgement, written by John R. Turnheim, Chief Judge of United State District Court of Minnesota, dismisses all of MacDonald’s claims. Because the court has ruled that no grounds exist for the lawsuit, attorneys representing Dakota County have requested that the court order MacDonald to pay costs incurred by Dakota County due to the lawsuit.

In March of 2016, the court dismissed many of MacDonald’s claims including, false arrest, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution and retaliatory prosecution leaving only a few claims left to argue.

At that time, the court also found no grounds for claims of excessive force and state assault and battery “which related to her removal from the courtroom, removal of her personal effects, and placement in a wheelchair.”

Also dismissed were claims of equal protection, federal conspiracy, negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress and finally a claim by Thomas Shimota, MacDonald’s husband, for loss of consortium. Continue reading →

Court affirms ruling that Michelle MacDonald ‘knowingly violated’ campaign law

September 11, 2017 Comments Off read Legal Developments, Michelle MacDonald

The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed a ruling from the Office of Administrative Hearings that Michelle MacDonald, who was a candidate for the Minnesota Supreme Court in 2016, “knowingly violated” campaign law when she falsely claimed she was endorsed by a non-existent Republican organization.

Last December, the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) ruled against MacDonald and also imposed a $500 civil penalty for violating the Minnesota Fair Campaign Practices Act. The initial complaint against MacDonald was filed by Barbara Linert of Eagan and Steve Timmer of Edina.

The ruling from the Minnesota Court of Appeals highlighted that “the falsity of [MacDonald’s] statement” is what triggered the violation of the law:

In an interview about today’s ruling Linert said “Michelle MacDonald asked the Minnesota Court of Appeals to find the Minnesota Fair Campaign Practices Act unconstitutional and a violation of her First Amendment rights.”

Linert continued, “if they had found in her favor, any candidate in any election could lie about their endorsement without penalty of law. The court saw the importance of protecting voters from that chaos and ruled against her.”

“Hopefully this will be the final nail in the coffin of Michelle MacDonald’s judicial aspirations,” added Linert.

Timmer called the ruling “an important, win for protecting voters from deception.”

Timmer added, “MacDonald’s position was that she could say anything, truthful or not, and be protected by the First Amendment. Our counsel, Karl Procaccini from Greene Espel, framed the issue perfectly in his opening remarks to the Court of Appeals: Does ‘Michelle MacDonald have a constitutional right to lie about an endorsement she doesn’t have?'” Continue reading →

Lawyers Board: Michelle MacDonald’s ‘serious misconduct’ warrants suspension of her law license

May 15, 2017 Comments Off read Analysis, Legal Developments, Michelle MacDonald

Michelle MacDonald’s behavior during a family court hearing for Sandra Grazzini-Rucki was described as “the ultimate dereliction of an attorney’s duty, and is unquestionably serious misconduct warranting suspension” in a brief filed by the Minnesota Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board involving the attorney complaint against MacDonald.

A judicial referee appointed by the Minnesota Supreme Court recommended in January that MacDonald’s law license be suspended for a minimum of 60 days, followed by two years of probation, which would include a mental health evaluation.

The recommendation by Judge Heather Sweetland comes after a two-day hearing was held last November about an attorney complaint filed against MacDonald, who was a candidate for the Minnesota Supreme Court in 2014 and 2016.

MacDonald is appealing the recommendation that her law license be suspended and the brief filed by Susan M. Humiston, Director of the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board. Continue reading →

On This Date: Michelle MacDonald makes her first appearance in court for Sandra Grazzini-Rucki

February 27, 2017 Comments Off read Analysis, Michelle MacDonald

Michelle MacDonald made her first appearance in family court on behalf of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki on February 26, 2013. MacDonald’s work on behalf of Grazzini-Rucki created controversy and turmoil in court, and MacDonald’s law license may be suspended for her conduct while serving as Grazzini-Rucki’s attorney.

Minutes into the court hearing, the judge said “this is not the way that I expected to start off this hearing.”

According to court documents from February 23, 2013, MacDonald requested the court take a roll call to determine the names of everyone in the courtroom, including members of the public. The court documents also show that MacDonald repeatedly interrupted the court proceedings, with MacDonald later apologizing for comments she made during the court hearing. Continue reading →

Michelle MacDonald discloses law enforcement considered her a ‘suspect’

February 21, 2017 Comments Off read Analysis, Media, Michelle MacDonald

Michelle MacDonald has disclosed law enforcement considered her a “suspect” in the disappearance of the two sisters from Lakeville, according to a publication co-authored by MacDonald.

MacDonald serves as Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s family court attorney. Grazzini-Rucki was convicted last July on six felony counts of deprivation of parental rights for her role in the disappearance of her two daughters, Samantha and Gianna Rucki.

In the publication, MacDonald provides details on a phone conversation she had with Lieutenant Jason Polinski of the Lakeville Police Department. According to MacDonald, Polinski said she was no longer considered a suspect:

“Finally, he said I was no longer a suspect unless someone came in with evidence I participated in the girls’ disappearance and I appeared on early on with eighteen others.”

MacDonald also admits in her publication that she “suspected the only evidence they have is that I’ve been Sandra’s attorney throughout her ordeal.” Continue reading →

Michelle MacDonald appeals possible suspension of law license, campaign law violation

January 27, 2017 Comments Off read Legal Developments, Michelle MacDonald

Michelle MacDonald is appealing both a recommendation from a Minnesota Supreme Court referee that her law license be suspended and a ruling from a three-judge panel which ruled she “knowingly violated” campaign law when she falsely claimed her campaign was endorsed by a non-existent Republican organization.

Court documents show attorneys for MacDonald filed paperwork with the Minnesota Court of Appeals within the last few days on both appeals.

Minnesota Supreme Court referee recommended suspension of Michelle MacDonald’s law license

A judicial referee appointed by the Minnesota Supreme Court recommended earlier this month that Michelle MacDonald’s law license be suspended for a minimum of 60 days, followed by two years of probation, which would include a mental health evaluation.

The recommendation by Judge Heather Sweetland comes after a two day hearing was held last November about an attorney complaint filed against MacDonald, who was a candidate for the Minnesota Supreme Court in 2014 and 2016, and who also serves as Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s family court attorney.

MacDonald was arrested during a family court hearing in September 2013 while serving as Grazzini-Rucki’s attorney. The public booking from MacDonald’s arrest by the Dakota County Sheriff’s Office is pictured above-left. Continue reading →

MN Supreme Court referee recommends suspension of Michelle MacDonald’s law license

January 5, 2017 Comments Off read Legal Developments, Michelle MacDonald

A judicial referee appointed by the Minnesota Supreme Court has recommended that Michelle MacDonald’s law license be suspended for a minimum of 60 days, followed by two years of probation, which would include a mental health evaluation.

The recommendation by Judge Heather Sweetland comes after a two day hearing was held in November about an attorney complaint filed against MacDonald, who was a candidate for the Minnesota Supreme Court in 2014 and 2016, and who also serves as Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s family court attorney.

Below are the findings issued by Judge Sweetland regarding MacDonald.

Michelle MacDonald – Referee Findings Fact, Conclusion of Law, Recommendation for Discipline – January 03,… by Michael Brodkorb on Scribd

Attorney complaint against MacDonald alleged violation of rules governing attorney conduct

The 16-page petition for disciplinary action for violating of rules governing attorney conduct was filed against MacDonald by the Director of the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board, Susan M. Humiston

Continue reading →

Court rules Michelle MacDonald ‘knowingly violated’ campaign law

December 27, 2016 Comments Off read Legal Developments, Michelle MacDonald

A three-judge panel has ruled that Michelle MacDonald, who was a candidate for the Minnesota Supreme Court in 2016, “knowingly violated” campaign law when she falsely claimed she was endorsed by a non-existent Republican organization.

The judges with the Office of Administrative Hearings also imposed a $500 civil penalty against MacDonald.

Steve Timmer, one of people who filed the complaint against MacDonald said today, “I am not a fan of party endorsements for any judicial office. Even worse is when a candidate, campaigning to sit on the Supreme Court, says or implies that she is endorsed when she isn’t.”

Timmer added, “that is what Michelle MacDonald did, and I am glad that the Office of Administrative Hearings saw it that way, too.”

Complaint alleged MacDonald’s false claim of endorsement was a “knowing and intentional violation” of campaign laws

Judge Jessica Palmer-Denig held a hearing in November on the complaint filed against MacDonald by Barbara Linert of Eagan and Timmer of Edina, who claimed MacDonald provided false information to the Star Tribune for publication in their “Voter Guide.”

Linert said today that she “was glad Michelle MacDonald was held accountable for misleading the voters.” Continue reading →

Court hearing tomorrow on campaign complaint against MacDonald

December 20, 2016 Comments Off read Legal Developments, Michelle MacDonald

The Office of Administrative Hearings will convene a three-judge panel tomorrow for an evidentiary hearing on a campaign complaint filed against Michelle MacDonald, who was a candidate for the Minnesota Supreme Court in 2016.

The court hearing will be at the Office of Administrative Hearings at 9:30AM in St. Paul.

Just days before the election, Judge Jessica A. Palmer-Denig ordered there was probable cause to believe MacDonald violated the Minnesota Fair Campaign Practices Act by falsely claiming her current campaign for the Minnesota Supreme Court had received the endorsement of the Republican Party of Minnesota.

MacDonald was soundly defeated by incumbent Minnesota Supreme Court Justice Natalie Hudson on Election Day.

Complaint alleges MacDonald’s false claim of endorsement was a “knowing and intentional violation” of campaign laws

Judge Palmer-Denig held a hearing in November on the complaint filed against MacDonald by Barbara Linert of Eagan and Steve Timmer of Edina, who claim MacDonald provided false information to the Star Tribune for publication in their “Voter Guide.”

In 2014, MacDonald was the Republican endorsed candidate for the Minnesota Supreme Court against Justice David Lillehaug. MacDonald lost to Lillehaug by just 7 points — 53 percent to 46 percent in November 2014.

Earlier this year, MacDonald announced she would run again for the Minnesota Supreme Court, but she was not endorsed by the Republican Party of Minnesota after Republicans decided not to endorse judicial candidates.

Continue reading →

Judge: probable cause to believe MacDonald violated campaign law

November 4, 2016 Comments Off read Legal Developments, Michelle MacDonald

Just days before the election, Judge Jessica A. Palmer-Denig has ordered there is probable cause to believe Michelle MacDonald violated the Minnesota Fair Campaign Practices Act by falsely claiming her current campaign for the Minnesota Supreme Court had received the endorsement of the Republican Party of Minnesota.

Judge Palmer-Denig held a hearing earlier this week on the complaint filed against MacDonald by Barbara Linert of Eagan and Steve Timmer of Edina, who claim MacDonald provided false information to the Star Tribune for publication in their “Voter Guide.”

Complaint alleges MacDonald’s false claim of endorsement was a “knowing and intentional violation” of campaign laws

Continue reading →

Judge orders hearing on campaign complaint against MacDonald

October 27, 2016 Comments Off read Legal Developments, Michelle MacDonald

The Office of Administrative Hearings has ordered a hearing be held next week on the complaint filed against Michelle MacDonald, which alleges she violated the Minnesota Fair Campaign Practices Act by falsely claiming her current campaign for the Minnesota Supreme Court had received the endorsement of the Republican Party of Minnesota.

The complaint against MacDonald was filed earlier this week by Barbara Linert of Eagan and Steve Timmer of Edina, who claim MacDonald provided false information to the Star Tribune for publication in their “Voter Guide.”

In an order issued earlier today, Judge Jessica A. Palmer-Denig said the complaint filed against MacDonald “alleges sufficient facts” to “support finding a prima facie violation”:

The Administrative Law Judge concludes that the complaint alleges sufficient facts regarding Respondent’s claimed endorsements to support finding a prima facie violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.02.

Judge Palmer-Denig ordered a probable cause hearing to be held next Tuesday. According to the order from court:

At the conclusion of the probable cause hearing, the Administrative Law Judge will either: (1) dismiss the complaint based on a determination that the complaint is frivolous, or that there is no probable cause to believe that the violation of law alleged in the complaint has occurred; or (2) determine that there is probable cause to believe that the violation of law alleged in the complaint has occurred and refer the case to the Chief Administrative Law Judge for the scheduling of an evidentiary hearing. Evidentiary hearings are conducted pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 211B.35 (2016).

The complaint alleges MacDonald’s false claim of endorsement was a “knowing and intentional violation” of campaign laws.

Continue reading →

Campaign complaint filed against Michelle MacDonald

October 26, 2016 Comments Off read Legal Developments, Michelle MacDonald

A complaint has been filed against Michelle MacDonald, alleging she violated the Minnesota Fair Campaign Practices Act by falsely claiming her current campaign for the Minnesota Supreme Court had received the endorsement of the Republican Party of Minnesota.

The complaint filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings by Barbara Linert of Eagan and Steve Timmer of Edina, alleges MacDonald provided false information to the Star Tribune for publication in their “Voter Guide.”

MacDonald also serves as Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s family court attorney.

Complaint alleges MacDonald’s false claim of endorsement was a “knowing and intentional violation” of campaign laws

Continue reading →

Disciplinary hearing against MacDonald scheduled for November

October 14, 2016 Comments Off read Legal Developments, Michelle MacDonald

A hearing will be held in November involving the attorney complaint filed against Michelle MacDonald, who is currently a candidate for the Minnesota Supreme Court, and also serves as Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s family court attorney.

A 16-page petition for disciplinary action for violating of rules governing attorney conduct was filed against MacDonald by the Director of the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board, Susan M. Humiston

The complaint against MacDonald is focused on her behavior during family court proceedings involving Grazzini-Rucki and her legal representation of Joseph Francis D’Costa. The complaint alleges MacDonald disorganization required the trial to last longer than necessary, adding that MacDonald offered exhibits that “were a mess.”

MacDonald’s attorney told Minnesota Lawyer in August that she will fight the complaint.

On her campaign website, MacDonald encourages people to attend her disciplinary hearing, but promotes the wrong date of the hearing. MacDonald’s website states “the hearing is on Wednesday, November 16. All are welcomed to attend.”

The hearing is actually scheduled for November 15, 2016 at 9:00 A.M., at the Minnesota Judicial Center, Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board Courtroom.

According to the scheduling order, the disciplinary hearing is expected to last two days. A final determination on any disciplinary action against MacDonald will be announced in January.

The disciplinary hearing against MacDonald will be held one week after voters will decided if MacDonald should be elected to serve on the Minnesota Supreme Court. MacDonald is running against Justice Natalie Hudson.

This year, MacDonald was not endorsed by the Republican Party of Minnesota for the Minnesota Supreme Court after Republicans decided not to endorse judicial candidates.

Continue reading →

MN Supreme Court candidate ‘debate’ canceled; Was it ever really scheduled?

October 11, 2016 Comments Off read Analysis, Michelle MacDonald

Michelle MacDonald won’t be participating in a debate against incumbent Minnesota Supreme Court Justice Natalie Hudson, as the organizers of the debate quietly announced the event was canceled in tweet on Sunday morning.

MacDonald, who serves as Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s family court attorney, claimed last week that she would be appearing against Hudson “head to head in a televised debate” hosting by the Minnesota Voters Alliance this Wednesday evening.

Less than an hour after MacDonald announced she would be debating Hudson, a representative of the Minnesota Voters Alliance said Hudson had not yet been invited to participate in the debate.

Andy Cilek, Executive Director of the Minnesota Voters Alliance said MacDonald’s email was not accurate as Hudson would be formally invited to participate in the debate the following day.

But on Sunday, Cilek announced in an early morning tweet that the debate was “canceled due to scheduling conflicts. It will not be re-scheduled.”

Continue reading →

Michelle MacDonald dishonest about past attorney discipline

August 19, 2016 Comments Off read Analysis, Legal Developments, Michelle MacDonald

Michelle MacDonald vigorously denied any additional attorney complaints had been filed against her when asked during an interview earlier this year with Republicans who were deciding if she would be endorsed again in her bid for the Minnesota Supreme Court, despite being disciplined in 2012.

In her interview with the Republican Party of Minnesota’s Judicial Elections Committee on May 13, 2016, MacDonald acknowledges that an attorney complaint was filed against her in April 2014 with the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board by Judge David Knutson.

Knutson filed the complaint based on MacDonald’s behavior while serving as Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s family court attorney.

MacDonald said in her interview that she had not been informed by the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board if the investigation into Knutson’s complaint had not been completed.

Continue reading →