This page is an unofficial mirror and is not legal advice. Verify the document against the official source before relying on it.
Kurt S. Olson (2026)
w Fax 228-9511 *Peter J. Kiriakoutsos Karyl R. Martin, Esq.. Robin D. Melone, Esq. Sally H. Mulhern, Esq. Eric R. Wilson, Esq. Jeanne Timmons, Admin. Asst. /s/ Stephanie C. Hausman
Laurie Ortolano (via electronic mail) Simon R. Brown, Esquire (Counsel for Mr. Olson) (via electronic mail) Kurt S. Olson, Esquire (via electronic mail) cc: Elizabeth M. Murphy, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel (via electronic mail)
Chair Stephanie C. Hausman
Dated: March 17, 2026
Committee voted to approve the Respondent’s request to resign. On March 17, 2026, the Professional Conduct Committee deliberated this matter. The
ORDER ON REQUEST TO RESIGN
#25-003
Attorney Discipline Office
advs.
Olson, Kurt S.
*non-lawyer member *Everett S. Grass Richard C. Gagliuso, Esq. Oliver D. Bloom, Esq. *Ronald K. Ace Mitchell M. Simon, Esq., Vice Chair *Kathleen M. Ames, Vice Chair Stephanie C. Hausman, Esq., Chair
603-224-5828 Concord, New Hampshire 03301 4 Chenell Drive, Suite 102 a committee of the attorney discipline system Professional Conduct Committee New Hampshire Supreme Court Respondent was summarily suspended by the Supreme Court on January 29, 2026. In the Matter of Kurt S. Olson, Esquire, No. LD-2026-0003. Respondent has since complied with the conditions of the Supreme Court’s January Respondent has executed an Affidavit in Support of Resignation, which is attached Respondent waives confidentiality with respect to this matter and the contents of Respondent agrees to reimburse the Attorney Discipline Office for the costs The Attorney Discipline Office authorized Respondent’s counsel to report, here,
that it has no objection to this Request, though the ADO will file its own pleading on the topic.
6.
incurred in the investigation of this matter.
5.
his attached Affidavit.
4.
37(11).
to this pleading. The Affidavit contains all the information required by Supreme Court Rule
3.
29, 2026 Order.
2.
See
1.
pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 37(11).
Respondent Kurt S. Olson moves to resign as a member of the New Hampshire Bar,
WITHOUT OBJECTION BY THE ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE OFFICE RESPONDENT’S REQUEST TO RESIGN UNDER SUPREME COURT RULE 37(11),
ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE OFFICE
ADVS. OLSON, KURT S.
#2025-003
PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT 2
Simon R. Brown, NH Bar #9 279 /s/ Simon R. Brown
to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Esq. on this 10 day of March 2026. th A copy of the foregoing Respondent’s Request to Resign was delivered by electronic mail
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
sbrown@preti.com (603) 410-1557 Concord, NH 0330 2-1318 P.O. Box 1318 57 No. Main Street Simon R. Brown, NH Bar #9279 Dated: March 10, 2026 /s/ Simon R. Brown
& PACHIOS, PLLP PRETI FLAHERTY BELIVEAU
By his attorneys,
KURT S. OLSON
along with its recommendation that he be allowed to resign. WHEREFORE, Respondent asks the Committee to file his Affidavit with the Court I
be successfully defended.
6. I submit this resignation because I believe the charges contained in the Petition cannot
5. I acknowledge that the material facts upon which the Petition is predicated are true.
Discipline Office, #2025-003.
ADO ’ s Petition arose out of a complaint docketed as Olson, Kurt. S. advs. Attorney
Summary Suspension filed on January 27, 2026, which is attached as Exhibit B. The
been guilty of misconduct, as set forth in the Attorney Discipline Office Petition for
4. I am aware that there is presently pending an investigation into allegations that I have
this decision. I am fully aware of the implications of submitting this request.
3. My decision is made freely and voluntarily. I am under no coercion or duress in making
Rule 37(11).
2. I wish to resign as a member of the New Hampshire Bar, pursuant to Supreme Court
this matter, attached as Exhibit A.
1. I was summarily suspended by this Court on January 29, 2026. See attached Order in
Respondent, having been duly sworn, testifies to the following:
AFF IDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF RESIGNATION RESPONDENT KURT S. OLSON ’ S
ATTORNEY D ISCIPLINE OFFICE
ADVS. OLSON, KURT S. #2025-003
PROFESS IONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT 2
(NH Bar #9 279) Simon R. Brown
-------------------------------------------
was delivered by electronic mail to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Esq. on this 10" day of March 2026. A copy of the foregoing Respondent Kurt S. Olson's Affidavit in Support of Resignation
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
4 Dated: March 1, 2026 Exhibit A Exhibit B Respondent’s conduct merits a summary suspension under Rule
serious harm to the public or the integrity of the legal profession.”
misconduct which poses an immediate and substantial threat of
37(9-B)(a)(1) because Mr. Olson has “engaged in serious
1.
Summary
ADO states as follows:
preservation of the integrity of the legal profession.”). In support, the
court deems necessary for the protection of the public and the
court may suspend attorneys . . . upon such terms and conditions as the
Supreme Court Rule 37(9-B)(a)(1) and Supreme Court Rule 37(16)(f) (The
“Respondent”) from the practice of law pursuant to New Hampshire
suspension of the Respondent Kurt S. Olson, Esquire (“Mr. Olson” or
(“ADO”) respectfully petitions this Court to order the summary
The New Hampshire Supreme Court Attorney Discipline Office
37(9-B)(a)(1) FOR “SERIOUS MISCONDUCT”
PRACTICE OF LAW PURSUANT TO SUPREME COURT RULE PETITION FOR SUMMARY SUSPENSION FROM THE
LD-2026-
In the Matter of Kurt S. Olson Esquire
SUPREME COURT
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Serious misconduct is defined as any misconduct involving the In this case, Mr. Olson has admitted to accepting flat fees in Mr. Olson used the $25,000 for personal expenses. Within days of depositing the $70,000, Mr. Olson disbursed Mr. Olson has admitted to the ADO that he does not keep Respondent has engaged in serious misconduct which poses an Mr. Olson is an attorney licensed to practice law in New
2
8.
Background
the integrity of the legal profession.
immediate and substantial threat of serious harm to the public or
7.
has filed false trust accounting certificates.
accounting records, does not perform monthly reconciliations, and
6.
estate transaction.
$65,000 of it to another attorney for purposes of a personal real
5.
4.
forth further herein.
thereby, commingling and misappropriating those funds as set
directly into his operating account prior to earning those fees,
amounts of $25,000 and $70,000 and depositing both payments
3.
suspension or disbarment.” Rule 37(9-B)(b).
or funds” or “any other misconduct which by itself could result in
“mishandling or misappropriation of client or third-party property
2. Mr. Olson was also admitted to practice law in Massachusetts on During times initially material to this proceeding, Mr. Olson Mr. Olson currently practices law at Goulden Law PLLC, 486 Union Mr. Olson does not have a previous disciplinary history. This disciplinary matter was initiated by a grievance filed by Laurie Ms. Ortolano raised, inter alia Mr. Olson began representing Ms. Ortolano in March 2022 with
3
Court, District of New Hampshire (Concord) (“federal matter”).
Ortolano v. Bolton, et. al., Docket 1:22-cv-00325-LM, U.S. District
respect to a civil rights case filed in federal court captioned
15.
that she had entered into with Mr. Olson.
14., concerns with the fee agreements
Ortolano (“Ms. Ortolano”) on January 14, 2025.
13.
Ortolano Federal Court Matter: March 1, 2022, Fee Agreement
Factual Allegations
12.
Avenue, Laconia, NH 03246.
11.
03268.
practiced law at Olson & Olson, PA, 31 Franklin Rd., Salisbury, NH
10.
Massachusetts Bar.
June 20, 1996. He is currently on active status for the
9.
Hampshire. Mr. Olson was admitted to practice on May 27, 1997. At the outset of the representation, Mr. Olson presented Ms. The March 1, 2022, fee agreement (“first fee agreement”) required a Under the terms of the agreement, should either party terminate On March 1, 2022, Ms. Ortolano’s husband, Michael Ortolano (“Mr. Mr. Ortolano then electronically deposited $25,000 directly into his Mr. Olson admitted during a January 13, 2026 meeting at the
4
his home mortgage.
he utilized the funds to pay bills and personal expenses, including
ADO, with undersigned counsel, that once he received the $25,000
21.
March 7, 2022. [Exhibit 2.]
TD Bank operating account ending in 0418, via “wire transfer” on
20.
back.” [Exhibit 2.]
Bank. On March 3, 2022, the check was returned as a “charge
immediately deposited $25,000 into his operating account at TD
Ortolano”), paid Mr. Olson $25,000 via check. Mr. Olson
19.
reasonable value of his services.
the fee agreement, Mr. Olson would be entitled to payment for the
18.
flat fee of $25,000 up front, plus a reduced contingent fee of 20%.
17.
federal matter. [Exhibit 1.]
Olson was retained on a hybrid flat fee/contingent fee basis for the
Ortolano with a number of billing arrangements. Ultimately, Mr.
16. In fact, as of March 4, 2022, the balance in the operating account Between March 1 and March 14, 2022, Mr. Olson made, a total of [Exhibit 2; 12.] However, as of March 14, 2022, Mr. Olson had only earned On August 23, 2022, Mr. Olson filed the complaint on Ms. Mr. Olson worked on the federal matter on Ms. Ortolano’s behalf Mr. Olson did not provide Ms. Ortolano with an invoice for his work The first invoice that Mr. Olson provided on the matter was On March 4, 2022, Mr. Olson issued a check to Peter M. Malaguti for $4,750.00 with
5
Olson with the Ortolano litigation. the notation “Ortolano.” Upon information and belief, Mr. Malaguti later assisted Mr. 1
provided in February 2025 in response to an inquiry from the ADO.
28.
on the matter.
27.
throughout the remainder of 2022 and into the summer of 2023.
26.
defendants.
Ortolano’s behalf in federal district court against eleven separate
25.
$455.00 based his own billing. [Exhibit 3.]
24.
$16,857.92, from the operating account. 1
67 debits, issued one check and incurred bank fees totaling
23.
his own billing. [Exhibit 2, 3.]
As March 4, 2022, Mr. Olson had only earned $388.50 based on
in the account, $22,129.49, consisted only of the Ortolano’s funds.
was -$2,265.33. After the March 7, 2022 wire deposit, the balance
22. Mr. Olson provided a more comprehensive version to the ADO in Mr. Olson admits that he prepared and created the invoices in On September 7, 2023, Mr. Olson and Mr. Ortolano entered into an Olson & Olson, P.A. to pursue If you terminate the representation before we
6
. . . . performed prior to termination. of the flat fee based on the value of the legal services agreement, you may be entitled to a refund of all or part have provided all legal services described in this REFUND: . . . . account.” receipt, and it will not be deposited into our client trust described in this agreement. This fee is earned on $70,000.00 as the entire fee for the representation the outset of the representation you will pay us FLAT FEE: You have retained us on a flat-fee basis. At redress of grievances. documents and her right to petition the government for the civil conspiracy to deny her access to government claims she may have against various parties involved in Laurie Ortolano hires
In relevant part, the document provided:
[Exhibit 4.]
agreement entitled “Olson & Olson, P.A. Flat-Fee Agreement.”
31.
Flat-fee Agreement for $70,000 in the Federal Matter
follow-up request from the ADO.
(Rocket Matter), and from reviewing the file, and in response to a
response to the complaint utilizing his timekeeping program
30.
January 2026. [Exhibit 3.]
29. We On September 7, 2023, Mr. Ortolano paid Mr. Olson $70,000 via On September 8, 2023, Mr. Olson deposited the check into the Five days later, on September 13, 2023, Mr. Olson converted Based on the invoices for his services that Mr. Olson produced to Mr. Olson was, therefore, out of trust in the Ortolano matter in the Mr. Olson explained in his interview with the ADO that the $65,000
7
was intended to be used as a down payment for the purchase of a
37.
amount of $65,305.00 as of August 25, 2023.
36.
the total $95,000 the Ortolanos had paid him.
$29,695.00 in legal fees with respect to the federal matter out of
the ADO, as of August 25, 2023, Mr. Olson had earned, at most,
35.
contemplating. [Exhibit 7.]
for purposes of a personal real estate transaction the two men were
Law Offices (owned by Timothy Goulden, Esq.) by check No. 101,
$65,000 of Mr. Ortolano’s $70,000 by paying $65,000 to Goulden
34.
despite not having earned $70,000 by that date. [Exhibit 6.]
Olson and Olson operating account ending in 0418 at TD Bank
33.
check no. 1590. [Exhibit 5.]
32.
[Exhibit 4]. consult with independent counsel of your choice. should enter into this agreement, we recommend you agreement. If you wish to be advised on whether you are not acting as your counsel with respect to this NO ADVICE REGARDING THIS FEE AGREEMENT: Mr. Olson also represented that Mr. Goulden owed him $5,000 for Ultimately, Mr. Olson and Mr. Goulden decided not to purchase the Mr. Goulden produced copies of checks to the ADO reflecting that Mr. Olson continued to work on the Federal matter until November Mr. Olson did not provide an invoice to Ms. Ortolano and only The invoice Mr. Olson produced, on January 9, 2026 to the ADO,
8
43.
provided an invoice to the ADO in response to the complaint.
42.
refund for any work not performed.
provide an invoice for the work he performed on the matter and a
successor counsel, William Aivalikles, Esq., and that Mr. Olson
5, 2024 when Ms. Ortolano requested that he forward the file to
41.
November 8, 2023 to July 25, 2025.
the majority of the funds to Mr. Olson in payments made between
he deposited the $65,000 into his operating account and returned
40.
Laconia.
Franklin property and instead decided to rent office space in
39.
basis, such as covering hearings for him.
information and belief were paid on an independent contractor
work that Mr. Olson had performed for Mr. Goulden, that upon
38.
down payment.
building in Franklin and that Mr. Goulden intended to make the The ADO is in the process of investigating whether this figure is Ms. Ortolano requested the return of her files and original Mr. Olson returned certain files in the spring of 2025, including a Some original documents were damaged by water. Mr. Olson explained at a meeting with the ADO, that his office roof At the request of the ADO, Mr. Olson returned additional original These documents had also sustained water damage. Mr. Olson explained at a meeting with ADO undersigned counsel
9
work involves primarily criminal matters.
which he routinely deposits into his operating account. Mr. Olson’s
that his practice is operated primarily using flat-fee agreements,
51.
Admissions During January 13, 2026 Meeting with the ADO
50.
18, 2026.
files (specifically newspaper articles) to Ms. Ortolano on January
49.
had a leak.
48.
47.
USB drive of documents, to successor counsel.
46.
documents in November 2024.
45.
Failure to Return File
accurate.
44.
the Federal matter. [Exhibit 3.]
reflects approximately $102,022 worth of billed time with respect to Mr. Olson provided the ADO with monthly bank statements for The statements reflect retainers deposited into his operating Mr. Olson admitted that he does not perform monthly On January 13 and 14, 2026, the ADO issued subpoenas for Mr. The ADO has not yet received a response to the subpoenas. Mr. Olson did not perform monthly reconciliations. Mr. Olson did not maintain client ledgers. Mr. Olson accepted large flat fees for future work deposited directly Despite the above facts, Mr. Olson knowingly falsely reported on his
10
60.
of trust” on those matters.
into his operating account on at least two occasions and was “out
59.
58.
57.
Client Trust Account Compliance Certificate
56.
Savings Bank for February 1, 2022, through the present.
Olson’s client trust and other accounts at TD Bank and Franklin
55.
reconciliations of his client trust accounts.
54.
between $500 and $70,000.
accounts, rather than his IOLTA accounts, in amounts that range
53.
a Franklin Savings Bank operating account ending in 3564.
0418; a Franklin Savings Bank IOLTA account ending in 7986; and
account ending in 6354); a TD Bank operating account ending in
February 2022 through September 2024 for a TD Bank IOLTA
52. Mr. Olson also falsely reported the existence of only the TD Bank During June 2023 to October 2024, Mr. Olson maintained client Mr. Olson falsely reported on his trust account compliance Mr. Olson falsely reported on his trust account compliance During that time-period, Mr. Olson was engaged in the private
11
65.
belonging to clients. [Exhibit 11].
possession, or under their control, any funds or other property
practice of law during the reporting period and did not have in their
May 31, 2025, that: “The attorney(s) listed were not in the private
certificate for the reporting year covering June 1, 2024, through
64.
did in fact have an IOLTA account. [Exhibit 10].
May 31, 2024 that he did not maintain a NH trust account when he
certificate for the reporting year covering June 1, 2023, through
63.
evidenced by bank statements provided to the ADO.
trust accounts at TD Bank and Franklin Savings Bank as
62.
maintained an IOLTA account at Franklin Savings Bank.
IOLTA account during this time period, even though he also
61.
compliant with Rule 50. [Exhibits 8-11].
out of trust, was performing monthly reconciliations, and was
covering June 1, 2021, through May 31, 2023, that he was never
trust account compliance certificates for the reporting years Mr. Olson’s conduct in this case raises questions under the Allegations set forth above are incorporated by reference. Rule 1.5 states, in pertinent part, as follows:
12
(8) whether the fee is fixed or contingent. or lawyers performing the services; and (7) the experience, reputation, and ability of the lawyer with the client; (6) the nature and length of the professional relationship circumstances; (5) the time limitations imposed by the client or by the (4) the amount involved and the results obtained; legal services; (3) the fee customarily charged in the locality for similar preclude other employment by the lawyer; acceptance of the particular employment will (2) the likelihood, if apparent to the client, that the perform the legal service properly; of the questions involved, and the skill requisite to (1) the time and labor required, the novelty and difficulty expenses include the following: considered in determining the reasonableness of a fee or unreasonable amount for expenses. The factors to be or collect an illegal or unreasonable fee or an (a) A lawyer shall not enter into an agreement for, charge,
68.
67.
Rule 1.5: Fees
following New Hampshire Rules of Professional Conduct.
66.
Disciplinary Rules Violated
accounts.
practice of law and did maintain the aforementioned client trust Mr. Olson’s deposit of a $70,000 flat fee into his operating account, Allegations set forth above are incorporated by reference. Rule 1.15 states as follows:
13
or (ii) clearance of any other form of deposit by such funds at least equal to the sum of such disbursements, cashier's check, certified check, or electronic transfer of the receiving financial institution, of cash, bank upon (A) (i) deposit, receipt of which is acknowledged by (d) Funds may be disbursed from lawyer trust accounts expenses incurred. withdrawn by the lawyer only as fees are earned or fees and expenses that have been paid in advance, to be (c) A lawyer shall deposit into a client trust account legal appropriate for that purpose. service charges on that account, but only in an amount trust account for the sole purpose of paying bank (b) A lawyer may deposit the lawyer's own funds in a client safeguarded. property shall be identified as such and appropriately or any portion thereof. All client and third party six years after final distribution of such other property kept by the lawyer and shall be preserved for a period of all other property of clients or third persons shall be every other aspect of those Rules. Sufficient records of Hampshire Supreme Court Rules and shall comply with and third party funds as may be required by the New minimum financial records with respect to the client Supreme Court Rules. The lawyer shall maintain the in accordance with the provisions of the New Hampshire representation separate from the lawyer's own property, that is in a lawyer's possession in connection with a (a) A lawyer shall hold property of clients or third persons
71.
70.
Rule 1.15: Safekeeping Property and Supreme Court Rule 50
$4,000, constitutes an unreasonable fee in violation of Rule 1.5.
at a time when the only outstanding legal fees were approximately
69. Mr. Olson’s acceptance of large flat fees in the Ortolano matter that Mr. Olson’s deposit of these fees into his operating account Mr. Olson’s routine acceptance of large flat fees which he deposited Mr. Olson’s failure to perform monthly reconciliations and safeguard Allegations set forth above are incorporated by reference.
14
76.
Rule 1.16: Declining or Terminating Representation
client funds violates Rule 1.15 and Supreme Court Rule 50.
75.
directly into his operating account violates Rule 1.15(c).
74.
constitutes impermissible commingling.
73.
them violates Rule 1.15(c).
were deposited directly into his operating account prior to earning
72.
interests are not in dispute. distribute all portions of the property as to which the dispute is resolved. The lawyer shall promptly property shall be kept separate by the lawyer until the (one of whom may be the lawyer) claim interests, the possession of property in which two or more persons (f) When in the course of representation a lawyer is in render a full accounting regarding such property. request by the client or third person, shall promptly the client or third person is entitled to receive and upon client or third person any funds or other property that with the client, a lawyer shall promptly deliver to the this rule or otherwise permitted by law or by agreement notify the client or third person. Except as stated in or third person has an interest, a lawyer shall promptly (e) Upon receiving funds or other property in which a client institution. such funds to the lawyer from the receiving financial receiving financial institution, and (B) availability of Rule 1.16 states, in pertinent part, as follows: Mr. Olson’s failure to promptly invoice Ms. Ortolano’s matters upon Allegations set forth above are incorporated by reference. Rule 3.3 states, in pertinent part, as follows: Mr. Olson’s filing of four knowingly false client trust account Allegations set forth above are incorporated by reference. Rule 8.4(c) states as follows:
15
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
83.
82.
Rule 8.4(c): Deceit
certificates violates Rule 3.3(a).
81.
previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer; fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law (1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or (a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:
80.
79.
Rule 3.3: Candor Toward the Tribunal
failure to maintain his files in a safe condition violates Rule 1.16(d).
termination and return the requested files in a prompt manner and
78.
client to the extent permitted by law. incurred. The lawyer may retain papers relating to the payment of fee or expense that has not been earned or which the client is entitled and refunding any advance other counsel, surrendering papers and property to notice of the client, allowing time for employment of protect a client's interests, such as giving reasonable shall take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to (d) As a condition to termination of representation, a lawyer
77. Mr. Olson violated Rule 8.4(c) because he disbursed approximately Mr. Olson violated Rule 8.4(c) because he disbursed $65,000 of The conduct as set forth above demonstrates that continuing to Under the foregoing circumstances, an interim suspension is This conduct demonstrates that Mr. Olson has “engaged in serious
16
88.
Conclusion
matter.
completion of the disciplinary process for Mr. Olson’s docketed
legal profession. The suspension should remain in effect pending
necessary to protect the public and maintain the integrity of the
87.
profession.
threat of serious harm to the public or the integrity of the
allow Mr. Olson to practice law poses an immediate and substantial
86.
thereby converting and misappropriating such funds.
personal purposes relating to a potential real estate transaction,
unearned Ortolano fees within days of receiving such funds, for
85.
funds.
on the matter, thereby converting and misappropriating such
personal purposes, at a time when very little work had been done
$16,857.92 within two weeks of receiving a $25,000 flat fee for
84.
misrepresentation; (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or Mr. Olson’s conduct violates, at a minimum, Rules 1.5, 1.15, Mr. Olson’s misconduct constitutes “misconduct which by itself This Court should suspend Mr. Olson summarily due to his serious In the alternative, Mr. Olson may be suspended pursuant to Rule The ADO requests that it be appointed to conduct an inventory of
17
WHEREFORE, the ADO respectfully prays that this Court:
protect the interests of Mr. Olson’s clients.
accounts, and to take such other actions as may be necessary to
possession, including all funds held by Mr. Olson in any IOLTA
Mr. Olson’s client files and other client property in Mr. Olson’s
93.
Appointment of Inventory Counsel
37(16)(f).
92.
misconduct.
91.
meets the definition on both bases.
B)(b). In addition, it involved the mishandling of client funds and
could result in a suspension or disbarment.” Sup. Ct. Rule 37(9-
90.
misconduct merits summary suspension under Rule 37(9-B)(a)(1).
1.16(d), 3.3(a), 8.4(c), and 8.4(a) and Supreme Court Rule 50. This
89.
serious harm to the public or the integrity of the legal profession.”
misconduct which poses an immediate and substantial threat of Suspend Mr. Olson and initiate further proceedings consistent Order Mr. Olson to inform all clients of his suspension, and Freeze Mr. Olson’s IOLTA (if any) and operating accounts and Appoint, in accordance with Rule 37(17), an attorney to take Assess Mr. Olson for all expenses that may be incurred by the Enter such further orders as it may deem just and necessary to
18
(603) 224-5828 Concord, New Hampshire 03301 4 Chenell Drive, Suite 102 NH Bar ID No. 16478 Elizabeth M. Murphy, Esquire
ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE OFFICE NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT
Respectfully submitted,
protect the public.
F.
ADO in the investigation and prosecution of this matter; and
E.
action as is necessary to protect the interests of his clients;
possession of Mr. Olson’s files and accounts, and to take such
D.
assets of clients, whether real, personal, beneficial or mixed;
hypothecating, or in any manner disposing of or conveying any
order that Mr. Olson be enjoined from transferring, assigning,
C.
Supreme Court Rule 37(13)(b),(d);
submit an affidavit to the ADO attesting to same, as set forth in
B.
with Rule 37(9-B);
A. day of January 2026, to Kurt S. Olson,
19
Assistant Disciplinary Counsel Elizabeth M. Murphy /s/Elizabeth M. Murphy
also been provided to Laurie Ortolano via email. 03302 and via email and the Court electronic filing system. A copy has Esquire, at Preti Flaherty Beliveau & Pachios, PO Box 1318, Concord, NH via email and first class mail with a copy to his counsel, Simon R. Brown, Law” was delivered on this 27 th of the aforesaid “Petition for Summary Suspension from the Practice of Hampshire Supreme Court Attorney Discipline Office, certify that a copy I, Elizabeth M. Murphy, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel of the New
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Assistant Disciplinary Counsel Elizabeth M. Murphy
Dated: January 27, 2026 By: /s/Elizabeth M. Murphy