Private
Reprimand Summaries
Professional Discipline
The Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility, an arm of the
Wisconsin Supreme Court, assists the court in discharging its exclusive
constitutional responsibility to supervise the practice of law in this
state and to protect the public from acts of professional misconduct by
attorneys licensed to practice in Wisconsin. The board is composed of
eight lawyers and four nonlawyer members, and its offices are located at
Room 410, 110 E. Main St., Madison, WI 53703, and Room 102, 611 N.
Broadway, Milwaukee, WI 53202.
Disciplinary Proceeding Against Mario M. Martinez
On Sept. 18, 1998, the Wisconsin Supreme Court granted the motion of
the Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility (BAPR) and ordered
that the law license of Mario Martinez, 38, Milwaukee, be temporarily
suspended, pursuant to SCR 22.30, effective that same date. Martinez did
not contest the motion. A hearing was held before the referee presiding
over pending disciplinary proceedings. The referee made findings of fact
in respect to alleged trust account conversions by Martinez, concluding
that his continued practice of law during the pendency of the proceeding
poses a threat to the interests of the public and the administration of
justice. Martinez's law license will remain suspended pending
disposition of the proceeding and until further order of the court.
Petition to Reinstate Robert J. Urban
A hearing on the petition of Robert J. Urban, Milwaukee, for
reinstating his law license will be held before the District 2
Professional Responsibility Committee on Dec. 16, 1998, at 6 p.m. in the
Grain Exchange Room of the Mackie Building, 225 E. Michigan, Milwaukee,
Wis.
Urban's law license was suspended by the Wisconsin Supreme Court for
six months, effective April 27, 1998, as discipline for professional
misconduct. That misconduct consisted of Urban's failure to act with
reasonable diligence and promptness in handling four probate estates,
his numerous misrepresentations to the probate court of the causes for
his continued failure to timely complete one of them, and his failure to
cooperate with BAPR during its investigation of his conduct. Urban is
required by Supreme Court Rule 22.28 to establish by evidence that is
clear and convincing, the following:
1)he desires to have his law license
reinstated;
2)he has not practiced law during the suspension;
3)he has complied with the terms of the disciplinary order;
4)he has maintained competence and learning in the law;
5)his conduct since the discipline has been exemplary and above
reproach;
6)he has a proper understanding of and attitude toward the standards
that are imposed upon members of the bar and will act in conformity with
the standards;
7)he can safely be recommended to the legal profession, the courts,
and the public as a person fit to be consulted by others and to
represent them and otherwise act in matters of trust and confidence, and
in general to aid in the administration of justice as a member of the
bar and as an officer of the court;
8)he has made restitution or settled all claims from persons injured
or harmed by his misconduct, or in the event such restitution is not
complete, his explanation of the failure or inability to do so;
9)he has indicated the proposed use of the license after
reinstatement; and
10)he has fully described all business activities during the
suspension.
Any interested person may appear at the hearing and be heard in
support of or in opposition to the petition for reinstatement. Further
information may be obtained from Jeananne L. Danner, Deputy
Administrator, Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility, 611 N.
Broadway, Suite 102, Milwaukee, WI 53202, (414) 227-4623.
Disciplinary Proceeding Against Terrence J. Woods
The Wisconsin Supreme Court suspended the law license of Terrence J.
Woods, 57, Oconto Falls, for 60 days, effective Oct. 26, 1998. Woods'
misconduct consisted of failure to provide adequate representation to a
client in an employment matter. Woods failed to act with reasonable
diligence in representing the client, contrary to SCR 20:1.3; failed to
respond to the client's reasonable requests for information, contrary to
SCR 20:1.4(a); and failed to provide a client with information and a
reasoned analysis concerning a settlement offer from the client's
employer, contrary to SCR 20:1.4(b).
Woods has been disciplined for professional misconduct on three prior
occasions. In March 1993 he received a public reprimand for failing to
pursue properly the representation of two clients in criminal matters.
In January 1996 Woods was privately reprimanded for having agreed to a
settlement of a civil matter without his client's consent, and for
failing to provide that client with information on her case and for
failing to return documents and property to her.
In April 1998 Woods received a 60-day suspension for misconduct
regarding three separate matters. In the first, Woods failed to keep a
client informed and failed to return the client's property. In the
second, Woods failed to keep a client informed, failed to act with
reasonable diligence, initially failed to cooperate with BAPR's
investigation, and made a misrepresentation to BAPR. In the third, Woods
failed to act with reasonable diligence in the representation of a
client and failed to cooperate with BAPR's investigation.
Wisconsin Lawyer
