Suspended Twin Cities attorney predicts Minnesota Supreme Court will exonerate him

A key reason why a Twin Cities attorney faces disbarment by the Minnesota Supreme Court is an allegation that he advised a client to jump bail in a Wisconsin criminal case and then lied to a judge about it.

However, a Wisconsin agency that reviewed the alleged misconduct concluded there was no basis for further investigation and closed the matter.

That decision by the state Office of Lawyer Regulation wasn't mentioned in a 35-page petition filed last year by Minnesota's Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility (OLPR) seeking the suspension and possible disbarment of Lake Elmo attorney Michael Padden, even though six pages of the petition dealt with the alleged Wisconsin misconduct.

The OLPR filed its petition with the Minnesota Supreme Court, which gave it to a referee for review. Associate Justice Margaret Chutich last week suspended Padden, writing that the referee found seven violations by Padden under Wisconsin court rules and 22 under Minnesota court rules. The referee recommended Padden be suspended, pending resolution of the disciplinary proceeding.

In an interview Friday, Padden predicted that he will be exonerated.

"I feel confident that I will win because I have faith in the Minnesota Supreme Court, especially Chief Justice [Natalie] Hudson," he said.

Padden is accused by the OLPR of advising Steven Sweet, a Minnesota client convicted of a credit card scam, to jump bail and not appear for a sentencing hearing in 2017. Sweet was arrested on a warrant in 2020 and extradited to Wisconsin, where he was imprisoned for three years. A prosecutor originally had recommended sentencing Sweet to no more than six months.

The OLPR also alleged Padden lied when he told a Wisconsin judge that he had advised Sweet of the consequences of not showing up in court.

After Sweet's wife, Jessica Wiese, filed a complaint against Padden with the Wisconsin Office of Lawyer Regulation, intake investigator Timothy Poodiack said there was "an insufficient basis to proceed" based on preliminary evaluation.

Padden gave the Star Tribune a copy of Poodiack's April 2, 2020, letter to Wiese.

"Atty. Padden stated that he advised Mr. Sweet to appear for his sentencing hearing, and Atty. Padden's August 21, 2017 letter to the court indicates that he did not believe Mr. Sweet had a viable excuse for his lack of evidence," Poodiack wrote in the letter.

"Therefore, the matter will not be forwarded for formal investigation and will be closed at this time."

Poodiack added that Wiese could appeal. Padden said he has heard nothing further from the Wisconsin office.

Officials with Wisconsin's Office of Lawyer Regulation had no comment, citing confidentiality provisions, said Emily Loman, a policy initiative advisor with the Wisconsin Court System.

Padden is listed as a lawyer in "good standing" on the Wisconsin Court System website and is not included on a list of disciplined lawyers. Should the Minnesota Supreme Court disbar or otherwise impose discipline on Padden, however, its decision would be referred to Wisconsin courts for possible action.

Padden on Friday challenged an allegation made by the Minnesota OLPR that an audit of client funds kept in his accounts found a shortfall of more than $212,000. He said the audit was wrong and that he had saved his clients "hundreds of thousands of dollars."

Padden said that in handling the funds, he may have "inadvertently" violated rules he was unaware of. But he said that in "no way, shape or form, did I steal from anyone."