In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Sheehan

2007 WI 3, 725 N.W.2d 627, 298 Wis. 2d 317, 2007 Wisc. LEXIS 3
Wisconsin Supreme Court·Decided January 5, 2007·No. 2006AP842-D·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

¶ 1. Attorney John E. Sheehan has filed a petition for consensual license revocation *318 pursuant to SCR 22.19 1 stating that he cannot successfully defend against seven counts of misconduct charged in a pending disciplinary action as well as allegations of misconduct currently under investigation.

¶ 2. The referee filed a report and recommendation that this court revoke Attorney Sheehan's license to practice law and order he pay the entire costs of the disciplinary proceeding. No objection has been filed. On August 31, 2006, the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) filed a statement of costs of $4072.93.

¶ 3. Attorney Sheehan was admitted to practice law in Wisconsin in 1968 and most recently practiced in Beloit. There is no indication of any previous disciplinary history.

¶ 4. The seven counts of misconduct arise from 16 client matters. Counts One and Two involve the mishandling of client funds. The referee concluded that by failing to promptly notify the clients in writing and promptly deliver the funds to which they were entitled and, upon request, render a full accounting, Attorney *319 Sheehan violated former SCR 20:1.15(b), 2 as alleged in Count One. The referee further concluded that by misappropriating client funds and making misrepresentations regarding payment delay, Attorney Sheehan engaged in misconduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation, contrary to SCR 20:8.4(c), 3 as alleged in Count Two.

¶ 5. Counts Three through Seven involve trust account record keeping and commingling violations. The referee determined that by failing to account for and deliver funds belonging to numerous clients, Attorney Sheehan failed, upon receiving funds in which a client has an interest, to promptly notify the client in writing and to deliver to the client, funds that the client or a third party was entitled to receive, contrary to current SCR 20:1.15(d)(1), 4 as alleged in Count Three of the complaint.

*320 ¶ 6. The referee determined that by misappropriating funds belonging to numerous clients, Attorney Sheehan engaged in dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation, contrary to SCR 20:8.4(c), as alleged in Count Four.

¶ 7. The referee also concluded that by failing to create and keep the required trust account records from 1992 forward, Attorney Sheehan failed to keep records as required for his trust account, contrary to SCR 20:1.15(e), 5 now cited as SCR 20:1.15(f), as alleged in Count Five.

*321 ¶ 8. The referee further determined that by depositing a fee payment from the public defender's office to his client trust account, and issuing payments to personal creditors using trust account funds, Attorney Sheehan violated former SCR 20:1.15(a), 6 now cited as SCR 20:1.15(b)(1), stating that no funds belonging to the law firm or lawyer, except those reasonably sufficient to pay service charges, may be retained or deposited in the trust account, as alleged in Count Six.

¶ 9. The referee concluded that by not providing the OLR with documents and information as requested, Attorney Sheehan willfully failed to provide relevant information, to answer questions fully and furnish documents, and misrepresented information in a disclosure to the OLR, contrary to SCR 22.03(6), 7 as alleged in Count Seven.

¶ 10. Three grievances are under investigation, which were filed by clients referenced in the disciplin *322 ary complaint lodged against Attorney Sheehan involving the above seven counts of misconduct.

¶ 11. We determine that the petition for consensual license revocation shall be granted and that Attorney Sheehan's license should be revoked effective the date of this order. In response to this court's order to show cause, the OLR is not seeking restitution at this time. Attorney Sheehan shall bear the costs of this disciplinary proceeding.

¶ 12. IT IS ORDERED that the license of John E. Sheehan to practice law in Wisconsin is revoked effective the date of this order.

¶ 13. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that John E. Sheehan shall comply with the provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of an attorney whose license to practice law has been revoked, to the extent he has not already done so.

¶ 14. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date of this order John E. Sheehan shall pay $4072.93 to the Office of Lawyer Regulation for the costs of this proceeding.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Sheehan, 2007 WI 3, 725 N.W.2d 627, 298 Wis. 2d 317, 2007 Wisc. LEXIS 3 (Wis. 2007).

2007 WI 3 (In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Sheehan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Michael D. Mandelman
2014 WI 100 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2014)
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. David A. Goluba
2013 WI 32 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2013)