Wednesday, December 7, 2011

Reprimand and Costs

An attorney who failed to provide competent representation in a matter has been publicly reprimanded by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

Concern also was expressed about the attorney's non-cooperation with the bar's investigation:

The referee noted he was troubled by the fact that Attorney P..., with no good explanation, has again failed to cooperate with an OLR investigation.  The referee stated that the "only conclusion I can reach is that [Attorney P.] simply ignored his duties and responsibilities in relation to the ancillary probate proceeding he had agreed to undertake.  He also, for the second time, ignored his duties as a Wisconsin attorney to promptly and timely respond to a grievance as requested by OLR."  The referee found no evidence that Attorney P. had any kind of improper motive in failing to handle the ancillary probate proceeding or failing to timely respond to OLR's investigation, but concluded that Attorney P. "simply did not recognize the urgency and his responsibility to do so in either case."  On balance the referee recommended, and we agree, that a public reprimand is appropriate in this case.  The referee also recommended, and we agree, that Attorney P. should be responsible for all costs of this disciplinary proceeding which total $5,179.43 as of October 5, 2011.

(Mike Frisch)

Bar Discipline & Process | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Reprimand and Costs:


Post a comment