The South Dakota Supreme Court suspended attorney Tucker Volesky's law license for 30 days and placed him on probation for at least six months after determining he violated the state's Rules of Professional Conduct in his handling of several lawsuits and management of his law firm's trust account.
The disciplinary action stems from formal proceedings initiated by the Disciplinary Board of the State Bar of South Dakota, which recommended the 30-day suspension after investigating Volesky's conduct. The case, titled *In the Matter of the Discipline of Tucker Volesky*, was decided as an original proceeding before the state's highest court.
Volesky, a 2019 graduate of the University of South Dakota Knudson School of Law who was admitted to the State Bar of South Dakota in October of that year, denied the allegations against him. Due to his denial, the Supreme Court appointed retired circuit court Judge Craig Pfeifle to serve as referee and conduct an evidentiary hearing to examine the evidence.
Following the hearing, Referee Pfeifle determined that Volesky had indeed violated the professional conduct rules and recommended that the Supreme Court suspend his license for 30 days and place him on a probationary term of no less than six months. The Supreme Court, after reviewing the complete record and considering recommendations from both the Disciplinary Board and the referee, concluded that Volesky violated the rules and imposed the recommended discipline.
The case was argued before the Supreme Court on Aug. 27, 2025, with the court's opinion filed on Nov. 12, 2025. Chief Justice Jensen authored the opinion for the court, which was designated as case number 30736-SRJ and cited as *2025 S.D. 62*.
Representation in the disciplinary proceedings was handled by Thomas H. Frieberg of the State Bar of South Dakota from Beresford, who served as attorney for the Disciplinary Board. Volesky was represented by Michael F. Tobin of Boyce Law Firm, LLP in Sioux Falls.
The specific violations involved Volesky's conduct in handling several lawsuits and his management of his law firm's trust account. Trust accounts are special accounts that attorneys must maintain to hold client funds separate from their own money, and they are subject to strict professional conduct rules to protect client interests and maintain the integrity of the legal profession.
While the court's opinion notes that the violations related to lawsuit handling and trust account management, the specific details of the misconduct that led to the disciplinary action were not fully detailed in the available portions of the court record. The case represents a formal disciplinary proceeding, which is a serious matter that can result in sanctions ranging from reprimands to permanent disbarment, depending on the severity of the violations.
The 30-day suspension means Volesky will be temporarily prohibited from practicing law in South Dakota for that period. During the subsequent probationary term of at least six months, he will likely be subject to specific conditions and monitoring to ensure compliance with professional conduct rules.
Disciplinary proceedings against attorneys are designed to protect the public and maintain the integrity of the legal profession. The South Dakota Rules of Professional Conduct establish standards for attorney behavior, including requirements for client communication, handling of client funds, competent representation, and ethical business practices.
The court's opinion noted that its members were "in the unique position of addressing Volesky's conduct," though the full context of this statement was not included in the available record excerpt. This suggests there may have been particular circumstances or relationships that made the case noteworthy for the justices.
For Volesky, who began practicing law relatively recently after his 2019 admission to the bar, the disciplinary action represents a significant early-career setback. The suspension and probationary period will likely impact his practice and professional reputation, though the relatively short duration suggests the violations were not considered among the most severe.
The case demonstrates the state bar's commitment to maintaining professional standards and holding attorneys accountable for violations of conduct rules. It also shows the multi-step process involved in attorney discipline, from initial investigation by the Disciplinary Board through formal proceedings and ultimate resolution by the state's Supreme Court.
The disciplinary action is now a matter of public record and will remain part of Volesky's professional history. As he serves his suspension and completes his probationary period, he will need to demonstrate compliance with all professional conduct requirements to maintain his license to practice law in South Dakota.