Lawyer Discipline
The Office of Lawyer
Regulation (formerly known as the Board of Attorneys Professional
Responsibility), an agency of the Wisconsin Supreme Court and component
of the lawyer regulation system, assists the court in carrying out its
constitutional responsibility to supervise the practice of law and
protect the public from misconduct by persons practicing law in
Wisconsin. The Office of Lawyer Regulation has offices located at Suite
315, 110 E. Main St., Madison, WI 53703, and Suite 300, 342 N. Water
St., Milwaukee, WI 53202. Toll-free telephone: (877) 315-6941.
Disciplinary Proceeding Against
Nicholas C. Grapsas
Pursuant to a stipulation entered into by the Board of Attorneys
Professional Responsibility (BAPR, the predecessor to the Office of
Lawyer Regulation, OLR) and Nicholas C. Grapsas, 62, Madison, the
Wisconsin Supreme Court revoked Grapsas' law license, effective March 7,
2001.
The order of revocation stemmed from misconduct in two matters. In
the first matter, Grapsas represented a citizen of Cameroon on
applications for renewal of employment authorization and permanent
residence status. Contrary to SCR 20:1.1 and 20:1.3, Grapsas failed,
over approximately one year, to promptly take action to ever file the
applications or resolve any issues concerning the client's immigration
status in the U.S. Grapsas also failed to respond to the client's
reasonable requests for information concerning the status of the
applications, violating SCR 20:1.4(a). Grapsas also made false and
misleading statements to the client concerning the status of the
applications, and he misrepresented to a prospective employer of the
client that the client had filed an application for renewal of
employment authorization, violating SCR 20:8.4(c). In an initial written
response to the client's grievance, Grapsas falsely stated to BAPR staff
that he had filed the client's applications for renewal of employment
authorization and permanent residence status, violating former SCR
21.03(4) and 22.07(3).
In the second matter, Grapsas appeared at a hearing before an
immigration judge on Jan. 20, 2000, 10 days after the effective date of
a six-month disciplinary suspension to which he was subject, and two
days after being told by BAPR litigation counsel that he could not
appear on behalf of the client at the hearing, that the hearing likely
would have to be adjourned, and that, in any event, the court and client
would have to be notified of the disciplinary suspension, and the client
should be given an opportunity to retain new counsel. The immigration
judge, unaware at that time of Grapsas' suspension in the only state
jurisdiction in which he was licensed, granted Grapsas' motion to
terminate deportation proceedings against the client.
By failing to notify the immigration court of his license suspension
and by practicing after suspension, Grapsas violated former SCR 22.26.
Grapsas thereafter misrepresented to BAPR litigation counsel that his
only activity before the immigration court consisted of providing notice
of his suspension to his client and the court, violating SCR 20:8.4(c).
Grapsas' misrepresentation to BAPR litigation counsel, and his failure
to provide any response in an investigation commenced in the matter,
provided evidence of violations of former SCR 21.03(4) and 22.07(3),
which pertained to cooperation with investigations into alleged
misconduct.
In addition to license revocation, the court ordered restitution to
the client in the first matter in the amount of $574.
Grapsas was publicly reprimanded by the supreme court in 1993 and
1999. In December 1999, the court suspended Grapsas' law license for six
months, effective Jan. 10, 2000. Grapsas never sought reinstatement from
that suspension.
Medical Incapacity Proceeding Against
John F. Kerscher
On Jan. 23, 2001, John F. Kerscher filed a request pursuant to SCR
22.34(11) for the indefinite suspension of his Wisconsin law license.
Kerscher's filing acknowledged that he could not successfully defend
against medical incapacity allegations summarized in a filing by
OLR.
On March 9, 2001, the Wisconsin Supreme Court indefinitely suspended
Kerscher's law license due to his medical incapacity.
Petition to Reinstate Robert T.
Malloy
A public hearing on the petition of Robert T. Malloy, Oconomowoc, to
reinstate his law license will be held before Referee Michael Ash on
Friday, June 29, 2001, at 9:30 a.m., in the large conference room on the
13th floor at 780 N. Water St., Milwaukee. Any interested person may
appear at the hearing in support of or in opposition to the petition for
reinstatement.
On May 1, 1997, the Wisconsin Supreme Court suspended Malloy's law
license for one year, effective June 10, 1997. The suspension was based
upon several counts of misconduct involving many different clients.
Malloy failed to handle his client trust account properly by using funds
deposited by one client to pay for the court costs of another client and
by commingling his own personal and business funds with his clients'
funds, violating SCR 20:1.15(a). In addition, Malloy's trust account
records were filled with discrepancies and missing information,
violating SCR 20:1.15(e). While Malloy's mishandling of his trust
account was not intended for his own personal gain, the trust account
violations were substantially similar to the misconduct for which he
received a public reprimand in July 1994.
In several separate matters, Malloy neglected his clients' legal
matters and failed to communicate with his clients, violating SCR 20:1.3
and SCR 20:1.4. For example, in a divorce case, Malloy did not file
final divorce papers and a deed until six months after the divorce was
granted and did not inform his client of the filing. When the client
discovered that the documents had been filed incorrectly, she requested
that he amend the findings. Malloy failed to respond to this request,
and the client eventually retained a new attorney. In a separate matter,
a client retained Malloy in a modification of custody case. Malloy
failed to appear at a meeting with the client, and then he never
contacted the client again, despite the client's repeated telephone
calls and letters. In a bankruptcy matter, Malloy failed to respond to
his client's weekly telephone calls for six months and never filed the
bankruptcy. In two instances, Malloy failed to promptly refund unearned
fees, violating SCR 20:1.16(d). Finally, he failed to cooperate in the
BAPR grievance investigations into these matters, violating SCR 21.03(4)
and SCR 22.07(2).
While Malloy's law license was under suspension, the Wisconsin
Supreme Court suspended Malloy's law license for another 90 days,
commencing June 10, 1998. The second suspension was based upon
professional misconduct in the handling of four matters and Malloy's
failures to respond to BAPR's attempts to investigate the matters,
violating SCR 21.03(4) and SCR 22.07(2) and (3). In the first matter, a
court ordered Malloy to prepare findings of fact, conclusions of law,
and judgment of divorce. Malloy submitted the document, and it was
returned to him for corrections. One week later Malloy submitted another
document that the court again returned for corrections. Despite
communications from the court, Malloy failed to file the divorce papers
with the necessary changes for 18 months, violating SCR 20:1.3, and
ultimately the court commissioner made the corrections.
In the second matter, Malloy failed to appear in court on two
criminal matters with which his client was charged, violating SCR
20:1.3, and failed to return an unearned fee, violating 20:1.16(d). In
the third matter, Malloy represented a client in a civil matter. He
failed to respond to opposing counsel's discovery requests, failed to
respond to his client's inquiries about a court date, and failed to
inform his client of a deposition date, violating SCR 20:1.4(a).
In the fourth matter, Malloy was retained to obtain the return of a
car belonging to his client's brother that had been seized upon his
client's arrest. He failed to timely file the necessary documents,
violating SCR 20:1.3, and the car was not returned. Malloy also failed
to respond to more than 20 attempts by his client to contact him,
violating SCR 20:1.4.
Malloy is required by Supreme Court Rule 22.29 to establish by clear
and convincing evidence, that:
1) he desires to have his license reinstated;
2) he has not practiced law during the suspension;
3) he has complied with the terms of the suspension;
4) he has maintained competence and learning in 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 aid in the administration of justice as a member of the bar
and 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, has explained 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.
Further information may be obtained from Rachel Nadel, Investigator,
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 342 N. Water St., Suite 300, Milwaukee, WI
53202, (414) 227-4623 or toll-free (877) 315-6941; or OLR's retained
counsel, Robert G. Krohn, P.O. Box 151, Edgerton, WI 53534, (608)
884-3391.
Disciplinary Proceeding Against James
W. Snyder
On March 9, 2000, the Wisconsin Supreme Court revoked the law license
of James W. Snyder, effective on the date of the order. The court
entered the order after considering the petition filed pursuant to SCR
22.19 by Snyder requesting the consensual revocation of his law license
and the summary of misconduct allegations against Snyder being
investigated by the OLR.
Snyder's law license had been temporarily suspended by the Wisconsin
Supreme Court since Oct. 12, 2000.
Wisconsin Lawyer
