PER CURIAM.
¶ 1. Attorney Mark G. Pierquet has filed a petition for consensual license revocation
pursuant to SCR 22.19
stating that he cannot successfully defend against 32 counts of professional misconduct charged in a pending disciplinary action as well as other allegations of misconduct currently under investigation.
¶ 2. Attorney Pierquet was admitted to practice law in Wisconsin in 2001 and practiced in Menasha. In 2005 he was publicly reprimanded for failing to reduce a contingent fee agreement to writing; failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; and failing to abide by a client's decision concerning the objectives of a representation and failing to consult with the client. In addition to the public reprimand, Attorney Pierquet was ordered to continue medical treatment, comply with all treatment recommendations, and biannually provide full medical treatment records for two years following the date of this court's order.
See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against
Pierquet, 2005 WI 147, 286 Wis. 2d 87, 705 N.W.2d 90.
¶ 3. On July 25, 2006, this court temporarily suspended Attorney Pierquet's license based on his
failure to comply with the conditions imposed on his practice of law and also for his willful failure to respond or cooperate in pending Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) grievance investigations. His license remains suspended.
¶ 4. The 32 counts of misconduct arise from 12 client matters. Counts 1 and 2 involve the failure to provide competent representation to a client, contrary to SCR 20:1.1
and failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2)
and SCR 22.03(6),
actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).
¶ 5. Counts 3 and 4 involve failing to explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit a client to make informed decisions regarding representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(b)
and willfully failing to cooperate with the OLR, in violation of SCR 21.15(4).
Count 5 also involves failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct.
¶ 6. Counts 6 — 9 involve failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation of SCR 20:1.3;
failing to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(a);
failing to take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests upon termination of representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d);
and willfully failing to cooperate with the OLR.
¶ 7. Counts 10 — 13 involve failing to reduce a contingent fee agreement to writing, in violation of SCR 20:l.5(c);
failing to abide by his client's decisions concerning the objectives of representation, failing to consult with his client as to the means by which they are to be pursued, and failing to inform his client of all offers of settlement and abide by a client's decision whether to accept an offer of settlement, in violation of SCR 20:l.2(a);
failing to take steps to the extent
reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests upon termination of representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d); and willfully failing to cooperate with the OLR.
¶ 8. Counts 14 — 16 involve failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation of SCR 20:1.3; failing to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(a); and willfully failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f). Count 17 involves willfully failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).
¶ 9. Counts 18 — 21 involve failing to communicate the basis or rate of the fee to his client, before or within a reasonable time after commencing the representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.5(b);
failing to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(a); failing to take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests upon termination of the representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d); and willfully failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining
to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).
¶ 10. Counts 22 and 23 involve failing to take appropriate steps to protect a client's interests upon termination of the representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d); and willfully failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).
¶ 11. Counts 24 — 27 involve failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation of SCR 20:1.3; failing to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(a); failing to deposit a client's monies in an identifiable trust account, in violation of SCR 20:1.15(b)(1);
and willfully failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).
¶ 12. Counts 28 and 29 involve failing to take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests upon termination of representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d); and willfully failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).
¶ 13.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
PER CURIAM.
¶ 1. Attorney Mark G. Pierquet has filed a petition for consensual license revocation
pursuant to SCR 22.19
stating that he cannot successfully defend against 32 counts of professional misconduct charged in a pending disciplinary action as well as other allegations of misconduct currently under investigation.
¶ 2. Attorney Pierquet was admitted to practice law in Wisconsin in 2001 and practiced in Menasha. In 2005 he was publicly reprimanded for failing to reduce a contingent fee agreement to writing; failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; and failing to abide by a client's decision concerning the objectives of a representation and failing to consult with the client. In addition to the public reprimand, Attorney Pierquet was ordered to continue medical treatment, comply with all treatment recommendations, and biannually provide full medical treatment records for two years following the date of this court's order.
See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against
Pierquet, 2005 WI 147, 286 Wis. 2d 87, 705 N.W.2d 90.
¶ 3. On July 25, 2006, this court temporarily suspended Attorney Pierquet's license based on his
failure to comply with the conditions imposed on his practice of law and also for his willful failure to respond or cooperate in pending Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) grievance investigations. His license remains suspended.
¶ 4. The 32 counts of misconduct arise from 12 client matters. Counts 1 and 2 involve the failure to provide competent representation to a client, contrary to SCR 20:1.1
and failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2)
and SCR 22.03(6),
actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).
¶ 5. Counts 3 and 4 involve failing to explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit a client to make informed decisions regarding representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(b)
and willfully failing to cooperate with the OLR, in violation of SCR 21.15(4).
Count 5 also involves failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct.
¶ 6. Counts 6 — 9 involve failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation of SCR 20:1.3;
failing to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(a);
failing to take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests upon termination of representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d);
and willfully failing to cooperate with the OLR.
¶ 7. Counts 10 — 13 involve failing to reduce a contingent fee agreement to writing, in violation of SCR 20:l.5(c);
failing to abide by his client's decisions concerning the objectives of representation, failing to consult with his client as to the means by which they are to be pursued, and failing to inform his client of all offers of settlement and abide by a client's decision whether to accept an offer of settlement, in violation of SCR 20:l.2(a);
failing to take steps to the extent
reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests upon termination of representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d); and willfully failing to cooperate with the OLR.
¶ 8. Counts 14 — 16 involve failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation of SCR 20:1.3; failing to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(a); and willfully failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f). Count 17 involves willfully failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).
¶ 9. Counts 18 — 21 involve failing to communicate the basis or rate of the fee to his client, before or within a reasonable time after commencing the representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.5(b);
failing to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(a); failing to take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests upon termination of the representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d); and willfully failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining
to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).
¶ 10. Counts 22 and 23 involve failing to take appropriate steps to protect a client's interests upon termination of the representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d); and willfully failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).
¶ 11. Counts 24 — 27 involve failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation of SCR 20:1.3; failing to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(a); failing to deposit a client's monies in an identifiable trust account, in violation of SCR 20:1.15(b)(1);
and willfully failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).
¶ 12. Counts 28 and 29 involve failing to take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests upon termination of representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d); and willfully failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).
¶ 13. Counts 30 — 32 involve failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation of SCR 20:1.3; failing to take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests upon termination of representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d); and willfully failing to cooperate with the OLR, in violation of SCR 21.15(4), as well as failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2) and SCR 22.03(6), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).
¶ 14. Ten additional grievances are under investigation.
¶ 15. In response to this court's order to show cause, the OLR recommends that Attorney Pierquet be ordered to repay the State Bar of Wisconsin Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection $14,447.47, and that he be ordered to make restitution of $250 to L.C. and $50 to D.G.
¶ 16. Attorney Pierquet submits under SCR 22.19(2) that he cannot successfully defend against the allegations of either the pending disciplinary proceeding or the grievances currently under investigation. He states that he has carefully considered his options; that he is freely, voluntarily and knowingly filing the petition for consensual license revocation; and that he knows he is giving up his right to a public hearing as well as his right to contest each misconduct allegation.
¶ 17. IT IS ORDERED that the license of Mark G. Pierquet to practice law in Wisconsin is revoked effective the date of this order.
¶ 18. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Mark G. Pierquet shall comply with the provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of an attorney whose license to practice law have been revoked, to the extent he has not already done so.
¶ 19. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date of this order Mark G. Pierquet shall pay the State Bar of Wisconsin Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection $14,447.47 and shall further make restitution of $250 to L.C. and $50 to D.G.