Navigation
Vol. 72, No. 12, December 1999

Lawyer Discpline

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 342 N. Water St., 3rd Floor, Milwaukee, WI 53202.

Disciplinary Proceeding Against Jane A. Edgar

On Oct. 26, 1999, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ordered a two-year suspension of the law license of Jane Edgar, Milwaukee, 40, commencing March 22, 1999, the date that the court had temporarily suspended her license. In addition, the court ordered her to pay the costs of the disciplinary proceeding.

Edgar represented a woman in her divorce. When the homestead was sold in July 1997, the proceeds were turned over to Edgar to hold in trust. On July 24, 1997, Edgar opened a savings account into which she deposited $100,000 of the proceeds, and she entitled it an "escrow" account. Between Sept. 26, 1997, and April 6, 1998, Edgar made withdrawals from the account in the amounts of $4,000, $5,000, and $2,000, without the knowledge or consent of her client, the adverse party, or his counsel.

Opposing counsel received information indicating a possible shortage in the account and confronted Edgar. In response, Edgar wrote a detailed letter to opposing counsel misrepresenting that she was "shocked" to find that she had "mistakenly" withdrawn $11,000 from the escrow account, instead of from another account she had at the same bank. She then replaced the funds on April 21, 1998, with interest.

When the Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility (BAPR) initiated an investigation, Edgar admitted that the withdrawals were made knowingly, not in error. Edgar's conversion of trust monies to her own use constituted a violation of SCR 20:1.15(a) and SCR 20:8.4(c).

During the investigation, it was determined that Edgar did not have a client trust account. Instead, she used a single checking account for receipt and disbursement of client funds for a business account and for personal expenses. By commingling personal funds with client funds and not maintaining an IOLTA trust account, Edgar violated SCR 20:1.15(a). In addition, Edgar did not keep the required client trust account records, such as individual client ledgers and monthly reconciliation of bank statements, and she falsely certified on her Annual Bar Dues statements that she had kept such records, all in violation of SCR 20:1.15(e) and SCR 20:8.4(c). Edgar had no prior discipline.

Disciplinary Proceeding Against Keith E. Halverson

On April 27, 1999, the Wisconsin Supreme Court publicly reprimanded Keith E. Halverson, 61, Menomonie, for professional misconduct. In its order, the court directed Halverson to pay the costs of the disciplinary proceeding within 60 days and specified that if the costs were not paid within that time and absent his showing to the court his inability to do so, his law license would be suspended until further order of the court. Halverson did not timely pay the costs, ignored correspondence from BAPR in the matter, and did not avail himself of the opportunity to contact BAPR to discuss a payment plan.

BAPR filed a motion to suspend Halverson's law license for his failure to comply with the court's April 27, 1999 order. On Oct. 7, 1999, the court granted BAPR's motion and suspended Halverson's law license until further order of the court.

Disciplinary Proceeding Against John P. Louderman III

On Oct. 26, 1999, the Wisconsin Supreme Court publicly reprimanded John P. Louderman III, 52, Madison, for his failure to send a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) to a circuit court for its approval in a divorce action until more than six years after being ordered by the court to do so.

Louderman represented a client in a divorce that commenced in 1989. In October 1990 the court issued a memorandum decision which, in part, awarded the wife one-half of the husband's defined retirement benefits through a QDRO and directed Louderman to prepare the QDRO for the court's review. Between February 1991, and January 1993, Louderman took initial steps towards preparing the QDRO. It was not until March 4, 1997, however, that he submitted the QDRO to the court for review.

The supreme court adopted the referee's conclusion that by not sending the QDRO to the circuit court for its approval until more than six years after being ordered to do so, Louderman failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, contrary to SCR 20:1.3. In imposing a public reprimand, the supreme court took note that no one suffered any financial loss as a result of Louderman's neglect, although access to the husband's pension funds was delayed. The supreme court also noted that Louderman previously has received three private reprimands for professional misconduct.

Disciplinary Proceeding Against Mario M. Martinez

On May 6, 1999, the Wisconsin Supreme Court revoked the law license of Mario M. Martinez, 39, Wauwatosa, but held the issue of restitution in abeyance, pending further input from BAPR. (See, 72 Wis. Law. 49 (July 1999).) BAPR subsequently provided the court with a revised list of the clients and third parties from whom funds, totaling $157,907.96, had been converted. The revised list included a breakdown of funds owed to a medical care provider with known liens against several personal injury settlements. On Oct. 11, 1999, the court issued an order requiring Martinez to make restitution within 60 days of the order, in accordance with BAPR's revised restitution chart.

Disciplinary Proceeding Against William D. Whitnall

The Wisconsin Supreme Court suspended the law license of William D. Whitnall, 57, Racine, for 60 days, commencing Nov. 22, 1999. In addition, the court ordered that Whitnall pay the costs of the disciplinary proceeding.

Whitnall represented a client on felony charges of possession of marijuana and recklessly endangering safety, and in a civil forfeiture action brought by the prosecutor to seize the car the client was driving at the time of the crime. In the criminal matter, Whitnall failed to appear for the preliminary hearing and the pretrial. In the civil matter, Whitnall failed to timely file an answer and failed to make two court appearances, resulting in the striking of the answer and the seizure of the car by default. The court found that Whitnall violated SCR 20:1.3 by failing to timely file the answer and by failing to appear for two motion hearings in the civil matter.

In a second matter, a client filed a grievance in August 1997 relating to Whitnall's representation of him in a sentence modification matter. Whitnall failed to respond to two letters of inquiry from BAPR staff and did not provide a response to the grievance until Dec. 4, 1997. The court found that Whitnall, therefore, failed to cooperate with BAPR's investigation, in violation of SCR 21.03(4) and 22.07(2). The court noted that the failure to cooperate was mitigated by Whitnall's health problems at the time of the initial inquiry.

The court further noted, as an aggravating factor, Whitnall's prior discipline on three occasions for similar misconduct. Whitnall received a private reprimand in 1986, an 18-month suspension in 1992, and a 60-day suspension in 1994.