Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Joseph R. Laumann
This text of 2021 WI 83 (Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Joseph R. Laumann) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
2021 WI 83
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2018AP1478-D
COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Joseph R. Laumann, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant, v. Joseph R. Laumann, Respondent.
ATTORNEY LAUMANN REINSTATEMENT PROCEEDINGS Reported at 385 Wis. 2d 152,922 N.W.2d 520 PDC No:2019 WI 3 - Published
OPINION FILED: November 23, 2021 SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: ORAL ARGUMENT:
SOURCE OF APPEAL: COURT: COUNTY: JUDGE:
JUSTICES: Per Curiam. NOT PARTICIPATING:
ATTORNEYS: 2021 WI 83 NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports. No. 2018AP1478-D
STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Joseph R. Laumann, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation, FILED Complainant, NOV 23, 2021 v. Sheila T. Reiff Clerk of Supreme Court Joseph R. Laumann,
Respondent.
ATTORNEY reinstatement proceeding. Reinstatement granted.
¶1 PER CURIAM. This court has pending before it Attorney Joseph R. Laumann's petition for reinstatement of his license to
practice law in Wisconsin. Upon consideration of the reinstatement
petition; the Office of Lawyer Regulation's (OLR) response
pursuant to Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 22.30(4); the parties'
SCR 22.30(5)(a) stipulation; and the OLR's memorandum in support
of the stipulation, we conclude that Attorney Laumann's petition
for reinstatement should be granted.
¶2 Attorney Laumann was admitted to practice law in Wisconsin in 1999. He had been admitted to practice law in No. 2018AP1478-D
Maryland in 1998. Attorney Laumann's Wisconsin law license was
suspended in May 2008 for failure to comply with continuing legal
education (CLE) requirements and in October of 2008 for failure to
pay state bar dues. The Board of Bar Examiners filed a memorandum
on June 22, 2021, stating that Attorney Laumann was currently in
compliance with the court's CLE and ethics and professional
responsibility requirements. His Wisconsin law license remains
administratively suspended for failure to pay state bar dues.
¶3 On January 18, 2019, this court suspended Attorney
Laumann's Wisconsin law license for a period of six months. See
In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Laumann, 2019 WI 3, 385
Wis. 2d 152, 922 N.W.2d 520. That suspension was reciprocal to
that imposed upon Attorney Laumann by the Court of Appeals of
Maryland. Attorney Laumann's misconduct in Maryland arose out of
four separate client matters and included failing to maintain a
client's funds in trust; misrepresenting to a bankruptcy court
that he had mailed payments to a bankruptcy trustee; failing to
maintain adequate trust account records; withdrawing cash from his trust account for unauthorized purposes; failing to appear on time
for a divorce hearing and misrepresenting to a court why he had
missed the hearing; improperly filing a complaint for child custody
in one county when he knew that the client had a custody proceeding
already pending in another county; improperly disclosing
confidential and privileged information in court filings; failing
to have a written fee agreement with a client; attempting to
collect legal fees from a client that had previously been
2 No. 2018AP1478-D
collected; and increasing his hourly rate without communicating
the rate increase to the client.
¶4 Attorney Laumann filed a petition for the reinstatement
of his Wisconsin law license on June 21, 2021. The OLR
investigated Attorney Laumann's petition and found he had
demonstrated that he has satisfied all of the criteria for
reinstatement. The OLR noted that Attorney Laumann has maintained
competence and learning in the law by attendance at identified
educational activities. It also noted that Attorney Laumann's
conduct since his suspension has been exemplary and beyond reproach
and he has a proper understanding of an attitude toward the
standards that are imposed upon members of the bar and will act in
conformity with those standards.
¶5 On September 20, 2021, the parties filed a stipulation
in which the OLR stated that Attorney Laumann has met his
SCR 22.305 burden to prove by clear, satisfactory, and convincing
evidence:
(1) That he has the moral character to practice law in Wisconsin.
(2) That his resumption of the practice of law will not be detrimental to the administration of justice or subversive of the public interest.
(3) That his representations in the petition, including the representations required by SCR 22.29(4)(a) to (m) and 22.29(5), are substantiated.
(4) That he has complied fully with the terms of the order of suspension or revocation and with the requirements of SCR 22.26.
3 No. 2018AP1478-D
¶6 The OLR also filed a memorandum in support of the
stipulation in which it reiterates that Attorney Laumann has
satisfactorily complied with the terms of the suspension order and
the OLR did not identify any adverse material issues during the
its investigation of Attorney Laumann's reinstatement petition.
¶7 The parties' joint stipulation for Attorney Laumann's
reinstatement is now before us. Effective January 1, 2021, new
reinstatement provisions permit this court to consider a
reinstatement petition by stipulation where, as here, the OLR
concludes, upon investigation, that the petitioner has
demonstrated, to the OLR's director's satisfaction, that all of
the reinstatement criteria have been met. See SCR 22.305 and
SCR 22.29(4). The court considers the petition and stipulation
without the appointment of a referee and may approve the
stipulation and reinstate the petitioner's law license; the court
may reject the stipulation and refer the petition to a referee for
a hearing; or the court may direct the parties to consider
modifications to the stipulation. SCR 22.30(5)(b). ¶8 Based on the stipulation, and noting that the record
contains no evidence to the contrary, we conclude that Attorney
Laumann has established by clear, satisfactory, and convincing
evidence that he has satisfied all of the criteria necessary for
reinstatement. Accordingly, we accept the parties' stipulation
pursuant to SCR 22.30(5)(b), and we reinstate Attorney Laumann's
license to practice law in Wisconsin, effective the date of this
order.
4 No. 2018AP1478-D
¶9 IT IS ORDERED that the petition for reinstatement of
Joseph R. Laumann to practice law in Wisconsin is granted,
effective the date of this order.
¶10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the administrative suspension
of Joseph R. Laumann's license to practice law in Wisconsin, due
to his failure to pay mandatory bar dues shall remain in effect
until that reason for the administrative suspension has been
rectified pursuant to SCR 22.28(1).
¶11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that exhibits 1 and 2 attached to
the reinstatement petition, which contain medical and financial
records, shall remain sealed until further order of the court.
¶12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no costs will be imposed in
connection with this reinstatement proceeding.
5 No. 2018AP1478-D
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2021 WI 83, 966 N.W.2d 620, 399 Wis. 2d 466, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-lawyer-regulation-v-joseph-r-laumann-wis-2021.