In re Disciplinary Action Against Novak
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 2019, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- In re Disciplinary Action against Sklar (Minn. 2019)
- In re Disciplinary Action Against Sea (Minn. 2019)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
ORDER
The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility has filed a petition for disciplinary action alleging that respondent Mark Francis Novak committed professional misconduct warranting public discipline, namely, making knowingly false statements to a court and opposing counsel, in violation of Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 3.3(a)(1), 4.1, and 8.4(c) and (d). In a stipulation for discipline, respondent unconditionally admits the allegations of the petition, waives his procedural rights under Rule 14, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR), and with the Director recommends that the appropriate discipline is a public reprimand. Along with the stipulation for discipline, the Director included a memorandum indicating that a public reprimand is the appropriate discipline in light of evidence of mitigating factors present in this case.
[W]e have suspended attorneys for misrepresentations made to our judicial officers. In re Jensen, 542 N.W.2d 627, 634 (Minn. 1996). We have suspended attorneys when the attorney’s misconduct involved a single misrepresentation to a court. See, e.g., In re Michael, 836 N.W.2d 753, 758-59, 767 (Minn. 2013) (30-day suspension for making a false statement to a court, disobeying a court order, making a frivolous argument, and improperly accusing a judge of bias); In re Warpeha, 802 N.W.2d 361, 361 (Minn. 2011) (order) (60-day suspension for making a false statement about the attorney’s criminal history during voir dire when he was a potential juror); In re Van Liew, 712 N.W.2d 758, 758 (Minn. 2006) (order) (90-day suspension for making a false statement to a tribunal and failing to file opposition to a motion); In re Scott, 657 N.W.2d 567, 568 (Minn. 2003) (order) (30-day suspension for making false statements to a court in attorney’s divorce and custody proceeding).
The court has independently reviewed the file and, in light of the evidence of mitigating factors, approves the recommended disposition.
Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Respondent Mark Francis Novak'is publicly reprimanded; and
2. Respondent shall pay $900 in costs pursuant to Rule 24, RLPR.
BY THE COURT:
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.