PER CURIAM.
¶ 1. We review the stipulation filed by Attorney Jane Edgar and the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) pursuant to SCR 22.12,
which sets forth findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding Attorney Edgar's professional misconduct. Attorney
Edgar is already under suspension for misconduct committed between 1996 and 1999.
In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Edgar,
230 Wis. 2d 205, 601 N.W.2d 284 (1999). The 23 counts of misconduct that are the subject of this disciplinary proceeding were committed during the same period of time as the matters addressed in the prior disciplinary matter.
¶ 2. The parties have stipulated that a one-year suspension of Attorney Edgar's license to practice law is appropriate discipline for the additional incidents of misconduct described in the stipulation. The parties also agree that the suspension should be imposed retroactively, so that it will run consecutive to the suspension imposed in the prior disciplinary matter. The parties have stipulated further that Attorney Edgar shall pay restitution to four clients as set forth herein, and that Attorney Edgar's reinstatement shall be subject to certain conditions, which are also set forth herein.
¶ 3. We accept the parties' stipulation and recommendation as to the appropriate discipline for Attorney Edgar.
¶ 4. Attorney Edgar was admitted to practice in 1985. She was suspended effective March 22, 1999; for two years for converting $11,000 that belonged to a client and an adverse party in a divorce action, for commingling her own funds and client funds in her law office business account, for making deposits into and disbursements from that account for personal expenses, and for having falsely certified that she had a trust account and that she maintained that trust account and bank records in compliance with the applicable rules governing the conduct of attorneys.
Id.
¶ 5. The stipulation submitted to this court describes an additional 23 violations of the Rules of
Professional Conduct, many of which were committed in the course of Attorney Edgar's handling of six client matters between 1996 and 1999. The remaining violations relate to her failure to respond to or cooperate with the OLR's investigation into her misconduct.
¶ 6. Attorney Edgar suffers from depression. She claims her depression affected her conduct. Attorney Edgar is under the supervision of a psychiatrist and she receives social security disability benefits due to her depression. She has advised the court that she does not have sufficient personal assets to enable her to pay the restitution she admittedly owes. However, the OLR notes that Attorney Edgar's depression is not technically a mitigating factor with respect to this disciplinary proceeding because she has not medically established that depression was a causal factor in her conduct.
¶ 7. In December 2002 the OLR and Attorney Edgar agreed to resolve this matter and executed a stipulation pursuant to SCR 22.12. The stipulation states that Attorney Edgar failed to take reasonably practicable steps to protect her client's interests in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d)
(six counts); failed to keep her client reasonably informed or to comply with the client's reasonable requests for information in violation
of 20:1.4(a)
(five counts); failed to act with reasonable diligence in representing a client in violation of SCR 20:1.3
(four counts); failed to cooperate with grievance investigations in violation of former SCR 21.03(4)
and former SCR 22.07(3)
(five counts); failed to render a full accounting in connection with a fee advance in violation of SCR 20:1.15(b)
(one count); practiced law while under CLE administrative suspension for a pe
riod of three weeks in violation of SCR 31.10(1)
(one count); and failed to obtain a written conflict waiver in violation of SCR 20:1.7(a)
(one count).
¶ 8. In addition to stipulating to the facts relating to these incidents of misconduct, the parties stipulated to discipline in the form of a one-year suspension of Attorney Edgar's license to practice law in Wisconsin, to run consecutive to her present suspension. The parties also agreed that Attorney Edgar should be required to make restitution of fees and costs collected in four client matters. More specifically, the stipulation provides that Attorney Edgar should be ordered "to make
restitution
of unrefunded fees/costs in the Day, Goomey, Wudtke and Martin matters." Stipulation at 32 (emphasis in original).
¶ 9. By order dated March 3, 2003, this court directed the parties to clarify the amount of restitution Attorney Edgar should be ordered to pay to each of the four clients identified in the stipulation. The OLR promptly filed a response, clarifying and supporting its position that Attorney Edgar should be required to make restitution to Neal Day in the amount of $1500; to Diane Goorney in the amount of $1000; to Mark Wudtke in the amount of $425; and to Anne L. Martin in the amount of $1700.
¶ 10. On March 17, 2003, Attorney Edgar filed a letter stating that she did not agree with the amounts of restitution proposed by the OLR. She requested an extension of time to search her business records and respond to the OLR's memorandum. The request was granted. The deadline for Attorney Edgar's response has passed and she has filed nothing further with this court.
¶ 11. Attorney Edgar has had repeated opportunities to provide any verification of amounts she earned or expended from these clients. She has failed to do so. The OLR's restitution assessment is consistent with the OLR's grievance investigation, its disciplinary complaint, and the SCR 22.12 stipulation. We therefore adopt the amounts proposed by the OLR as appropriate restitution in this matter.
¶ 12. Finally, the parties agreed that the following conditions should apply to Attorney Edgar's reinstatement:
(1) that Edgar's reinstatement be contingent upon her demonstrating that she has her depression and any other emotional or psychological problems under control, by her submission to an independent medical examination (IME) by a,health provider approved by the OLR, at her own expense;
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
PER CURIAM.
¶ 1. We review the stipulation filed by Attorney Jane Edgar and the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) pursuant to SCR 22.12,
which sets forth findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding Attorney Edgar's professional misconduct. Attorney
Edgar is already under suspension for misconduct committed between 1996 and 1999.
In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Edgar,
230 Wis. 2d 205, 601 N.W.2d 284 (1999). The 23 counts of misconduct that are the subject of this disciplinary proceeding were committed during the same period of time as the matters addressed in the prior disciplinary matter.
¶ 2. The parties have stipulated that a one-year suspension of Attorney Edgar's license to practice law is appropriate discipline for the additional incidents of misconduct described in the stipulation. The parties also agree that the suspension should be imposed retroactively, so that it will run consecutive to the suspension imposed in the prior disciplinary matter. The parties have stipulated further that Attorney Edgar shall pay restitution to four clients as set forth herein, and that Attorney Edgar's reinstatement shall be subject to certain conditions, which are also set forth herein.
¶ 3. We accept the parties' stipulation and recommendation as to the appropriate discipline for Attorney Edgar.
¶ 4. Attorney Edgar was admitted to practice in 1985. She was suspended effective March 22, 1999; for two years for converting $11,000 that belonged to a client and an adverse party in a divorce action, for commingling her own funds and client funds in her law office business account, for making deposits into and disbursements from that account for personal expenses, and for having falsely certified that she had a trust account and that she maintained that trust account and bank records in compliance with the applicable rules governing the conduct of attorneys.
Id.
¶ 5. The stipulation submitted to this court describes an additional 23 violations of the Rules of
Professional Conduct, many of which were committed in the course of Attorney Edgar's handling of six client matters between 1996 and 1999. The remaining violations relate to her failure to respond to or cooperate with the OLR's investigation into her misconduct.
¶ 6. Attorney Edgar suffers from depression. She claims her depression affected her conduct. Attorney Edgar is under the supervision of a psychiatrist and she receives social security disability benefits due to her depression. She has advised the court that she does not have sufficient personal assets to enable her to pay the restitution she admittedly owes. However, the OLR notes that Attorney Edgar's depression is not technically a mitigating factor with respect to this disciplinary proceeding because she has not medically established that depression was a causal factor in her conduct.
¶ 7. In December 2002 the OLR and Attorney Edgar agreed to resolve this matter and executed a stipulation pursuant to SCR 22.12. The stipulation states that Attorney Edgar failed to take reasonably practicable steps to protect her client's interests in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d)
(six counts); failed to keep her client reasonably informed or to comply with the client's reasonable requests for information in violation
of 20:1.4(a)
(five counts); failed to act with reasonable diligence in representing a client in violation of SCR 20:1.3
(four counts); failed to cooperate with grievance investigations in violation of former SCR 21.03(4)
and former SCR 22.07(3)
(five counts); failed to render a full accounting in connection with a fee advance in violation of SCR 20:1.15(b)
(one count); practiced law while under CLE administrative suspension for a pe
riod of three weeks in violation of SCR 31.10(1)
(one count); and failed to obtain a written conflict waiver in violation of SCR 20:1.7(a)
(one count).
¶ 8. In addition to stipulating to the facts relating to these incidents of misconduct, the parties stipulated to discipline in the form of a one-year suspension of Attorney Edgar's license to practice law in Wisconsin, to run consecutive to her present suspension. The parties also agreed that Attorney Edgar should be required to make restitution of fees and costs collected in four client matters. More specifically, the stipulation provides that Attorney Edgar should be ordered "to make
restitution
of unrefunded fees/costs in the Day, Goomey, Wudtke and Martin matters." Stipulation at 32 (emphasis in original).
¶ 9. By order dated March 3, 2003, this court directed the parties to clarify the amount of restitution Attorney Edgar should be ordered to pay to each of the four clients identified in the stipulation. The OLR promptly filed a response, clarifying and supporting its position that Attorney Edgar should be required to make restitution to Neal Day in the amount of $1500; to Diane Goorney in the amount of $1000; to Mark Wudtke in the amount of $425; and to Anne L. Martin in the amount of $1700.
¶ 10. On March 17, 2003, Attorney Edgar filed a letter stating that she did not agree with the amounts of restitution proposed by the OLR. She requested an extension of time to search her business records and respond to the OLR's memorandum. The request was granted. The deadline for Attorney Edgar's response has passed and she has filed nothing further with this court.
¶ 11. Attorney Edgar has had repeated opportunities to provide any verification of amounts she earned or expended from these clients. She has failed to do so. The OLR's restitution assessment is consistent with the OLR's grievance investigation, its disciplinary complaint, and the SCR 22.12 stipulation. We therefore adopt the amounts proposed by the OLR as appropriate restitution in this matter.
¶ 12. Finally, the parties agreed that the following conditions should apply to Attorney Edgar's reinstatement:
(1) that Edgar's reinstatement be contingent upon her demonstrating that she has her depression and any other emotional or psychological problems under control, by her submission to an independent medical examination (IME) by a,health provider approved by the OLR, at her own expense;
(2) that Edgar's licensure following reinstatement be conditioned on Edgar remaining in treatment as recommended by the IME and/or her therapist, monitored by the OLR via obtainment of quarterly reports for a period of two years following her reinstatement;
(3) that Edgar's practice of law be monitored by an attorney approved by the OLR for a period of two years following reinstatement, unless Edgar is either employed by a law firm or practicing with another attorney aware of her disciplinary and medical history.
¶ 13. It is relevant that many of the violations described in the parties' stipulation occurred at the same time as the violations that gave rise to the previous disciplinary matter. Indeed, some of the violations involved the same client matters. Accordingly, the parties suggest the one-year suspension stipulated to herein be made retroactive to March 21, 2001, the date Attorney Edgar's previous two-year license suspension ended. The practical effect of this equates to the court having imposed an aggregate three-year license suspension for Attorney Edgar's cumulative misconduct in these two matters.
¶ 14. We approve the stipulation and adopt the stipulated facts and conclusions of law as set forth therein. We agree that Attorney Edgar's misconduct warrants the suspension of her license to practice law for a period of one year, subject to the conditions set forth herein, and we agree that it is appropriate for the
one-year suspension we impose today to commence effective March 21, 2001, in order to run consecutive to the suspension imposed in the prior disciplinary proceeding. We agree further that Attorney Edgar should be required to pay restitution to the four clients identified in the stipulation and we adopt the amounts of restitution proposed by the OLR.
¶ 15. IT IS ORDERED that the license of Attorney Jane Edgar to practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period of one year, effective March 22, 2001.
¶ 16. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Attorney Jane Edgar comply with the provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of a person whose license to practice law in Wisconsin has been suspended.
¶ 17. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Attorney Jane Edgar is directed to make restitution of unre-funded fees and or costs to the following former clients, as follows: Neál Day: $1500; Diane Goomey: $1000; Mark Wudtke: $425; and Anne L. Martin: $1700. If restitution is not made within 60 days, the license of Attorney Jane Edgar to practice law in Wisconsin shall remain suspended until further order of the court.
¶ 18. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any reinstatement of Attorney Jane Edgar's license to practice law in Wisconsin shall be conditioned upon her satisfying the following conditions:
(1) that Edgar's reinstatement be contingent upon her demonstrating that she has her depression and any other emotional or psychological problems under control, by her submission to an independent medical examination (IME) by a health provider approved by the OLR, at her own expense;
(2) that Edgar's licensure following reinstatement be conditioned on Edgar remaining in treatment as rec
ommended by the IME and/or her therapist, monitored by the OLR via obtainment of quarterly reports for a period of two years following her reinstatement; and
(3) that Edgar's practice of law be monitored by an attorney approved by the OLR for a period of two years following reinstatement, unless Edgar is either employed by a law firm or practicing with another attorney aware of her disciplinary and medical history.