Monday, March 5, 2012
The Wisconsin Supreme Court denied the petition for reinstatement of an attorney suspended for two years in 1999.
The court noted concerns expressed by the referee:
...the referee found that Attorney... had failed to meet several of the criteria for reinstatement. Many of the criteria are interrelated, as evidenced by the referee's comments. The referee expressed an overriding concern about the manner in which Attorney...presented her reinstatement petition. According to the referee, Attorney...did not follow basic lawyering standards for presentation and refutation of documentation or witness procurement and preparation. More specifically, Attorney...did not present witnesses or exhibits either to support her petition or to refute an adverse exhibit offered by the OLR. The referee expressed concern that Attorney...twice incorrectly stated that the sole issue before the referee was whether she satisfied the supreme court's order with respect to having her mental health issues under control. The referee explained: "In her demeanor was both casualness about the reinstatement process and an unsubstantiated confidence in her readiness to resume practice."
The referee also indicated that there were incomplete disclosures in the petition. (Mike Frisch)