## Facts

- Gregory Ian Runge, a North Dakota attorney, was asked to assist Norman Franz, a 79-year-old nursing-home resident, who wanted to leave the facility.
- Franz had executed a durable power of attorney naming his daughter, Rose Pfeifer, as attorney-in-fact; the document stated Franz retained decision-making authority, could revoke the instrument at any time, and did not authorize medical decision-making.
- Nursing-home medical personnel had completed an emergency-care statement indicating Franz was incapable of making medical decisions.
- Runge searched court records for an existing guardianship or conservatorship and found none.
- Runge spoke with Franz by phone and later met him at the nursing home; Franz expressed that he wanted to leave and that Pfeifer was forcing him to remain.
- Runge drafted a written revocation of the power of attorney, explained it to Franz in person, and had Franz sign after concluding Franz understood the revocation and was competent to execute it.
- After signing, Franz left the nursing home and moved in with a friend, Ida Giesinger.
- Pfeifer filed a disciplinary complaint alleging Runge failed to comply with N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.14 (client with diminished capacity), including by not taking protective steps such as consulting family or facility staff.

## Issues

1. Whether clear and convincing evidence showed Runge violated N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.14 in advising Franz and assisting with revocation of a power of attorney given concerns about Franz’s capacity.

## Decision

- The North Dakota Supreme Court concluded the record did not clearly and convincingly establish a violation of N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.14.
- The court dismissed the disciplinary complaint and did not sustain the admonition.

## Legal Principles

- In attorney-discipline proceedings, alleged violations of the professional conduct rules must be proved by clear and convincing evidence.
- Under N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.14, a lawyer should maintain a normal lawyer-client relationship with a client with diminished capacity as far as reasonably possible and may take reasonably necessary protective action when warranted.
- Evidence that a client is elderly or has been assessed as unable to make certain medical decisions does not, by itself, establish that a lawyer violated Rule 1.14 in assisting the client with a legal decision, absent clear and convincing proof of improper conduct.

## Conclusion

The court set aside discipline because the evidentiary record did not meet the clear-and-convincing standard for a Rule 1.14 violation, and it dismissed the complaint arising from the lawyer’s assistance to a nursing-home resident in revoking a power of attorney.


In re Runge, 858 N.W.2d 901 (N.D. 2015)