Supreme Court Orders
The Wisconsin Supreme Court has amended and
created various Supreme Court Rules to suspend law licenses or refuse
bar admission if the attorney or applicant is delinquent in making
court-ordered support payments or fails to comply with a paternity
subpoena or warrant. The court has amended the rules of civil procedure:
Wis. Stat. section 801.16(2) to allow for the filing of papers by
facsimile transmission. The court also has amended SCR 60.05(8),
60.07(2), 70.36(5), and 75.02(1) regarding court commissioners. The
court has denied the petition to adopt rules for a mandatory fee
arbitration system. Finally, the court has amended SCR 70.15(1) setting
forth the membership of the Judicial Conference.
Procedure to Suspend Law License for
Noncompliance of Child and Family Support Orders or Paternity
Subpoena
In the Matter of the Adoption of a Procedure to Refuse to
Grant or to Suspend the License to Practice Law of a Person Certified
Under Wis. Stat. § 49.857 to be Delinquent in Payment of Support or
in Noncompliance with a Support or Paternity Subpoena or
Warrant
Order 00-05
In 1997, responding to federal legislation that addressed enforcement
of child and family support and other payments related to the support of
a child or former spouse, the Wisconsin Legislature enacted Wis. Stat.
section 49.857 to provide for the denial, nonrenewal, restriction, and
suspension of licenses of persons certified to be delinquent in making
court-ordered payments of support or failing to comply with a subpoena
or warrant relating to paternity or support proceedings. That statute
provides, in part, that the Wisconsin Department of Workforce
Development enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Wisconsin
Supreme Court, with the court's agreement, that includes, among other
things, a procedure by which the court would suspend an attorney's
license to practice law or refuse to grant bar admission to an applicant
if the attorney or applicant is certified to be delinquent in making
court-ordered support payments or failing to comply with a subpoena or
warrant.
The court, on its own motion, after
consideration of the matter at a public hearing and open administrative
conference on Oct. 17, 2000, and an open administrative conference on
March 7, 2001, has deemed it advisable to amend and create various
Supreme Court Rules to accomplish this purpose.
IT IS ORDERED that, effective the date
of this order, the following Rules be amended or created as
indicated:
SECTION 1. 10.03 (2) of
the supreme court rules be amended to read:
(2) Enrollment. Every person who becomes
licensed to practice law in this state shall enroll in the state bar by
registering his or her name and social security number with the
association within 10 days after admission to practice. Every change
after enrollment in any member's office address or social security
number shall be reported promptly to the state bar. The social
security number of a person enrolling in the state bar may not be
disclosed to any person or entity except the supreme court and its
agencies, or as otherwise provided by supreme court rules.
SECTION 2. 11.04 of
the supreme court rules be created to read:
11.04 Suspension for nonpayment of
support, noncompliance with subpoena or warrant.
(1) In this rule:
(a) "Subpoena or warrant" means a
subpoena or warrant issued by the department of workforce development or
a child support agency and relating to paternity or support
proceedings.
(b) "Support" means support as defined in
42 United States Code section 654(4)B.
(2) Upon receipt of certification from
the department of workforce development pursuant to section 49.857,
stats., that a person licensed to practice law in this state is
delinquent in making court-ordered payments of support or is not in
compliance with a subpoena or warrant, the supreme court may suspend the
license of that person to practice law for up to 5 years in the case of
delinquency in making court-ordered payments of support or for up to 6
months in the case of failure to comply with a subpoena or warrant.
(3) Before entering an order suspending
an attorney's license under sub. (2), the supreme court shall issue an
order requiring the attorney to show cause why his or her license to
practice law should not be suspended. The supreme court may inquire into
the reasons for the delinquency or any other matters the court considers
appropriate. The court may enter such orders as it deems
appropriate.
(4) The supreme court may return the
certification to the department of workforce development upon a showing
by the attorney that the department failed to provide notice of its
intent to seek license suspension and that, as a result, the attorney
was not aware of the right to a hearing as provided by section 49.857,
stats., or has not had a reasonable opportunity to pay the delinquency
or resolve the noncompliance with the subpoena or warrant.
(5) A license to practice law suspended
under sub. (2) shall be reinstated as follows upon whichever of the
following first occurs:
(a) Automatically upon the expiration of
the period for which suspended.
(b) By order of the supreme court upon
notification by the department of workforce development that the
attorney has paid the delinquent support or has made satisfactory
alternative payment arrangements or has satisfied the requirements under
the subpoena or warrant.
(6) An attorney whose license to practice
law is suspended under sub. (2) shall comply with the provisions of SCR
22.26.
(7) The supreme court may disclose the
social security number of a member of the state bar to the department of
workforce development for the purpose of administering s. 49.22.
SECTION 3. 40.06 (4) of the supreme court rules be
amended to read:
(4) The board shall not certify an
applicant while an attorney disciplinary matter against the applicant is
pending or the applicant is certified by the department of workforce
development as delinquent in making court-ordered payments of support or
failing to comply with a subpoena or warrant, as those terms are defined
in SCR 11.04 (1). If an applicant's license to practice law in
another jurisdiction is suspended or revoked for reasons related to
professional responsibility at the time the application is filed or at
any time that the application is pending, the suspension or revocation
is a sufficient basis for denial of certification.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that notice of
this amendment of the Supreme Court Rules be given by a single
publication of a copy of this order in the official state newspaper and
in an official publication of the State Bar of Wisconsin.
Dated at Madison, Wis., this 10th day
of April, 2001.
By the court:
Cornelia G. Clark, Clerk of Court
Filing Papers by Fax
In the Matter of the Amendment of the Rules of Civil
Procedure: Wis. Stat. § 801.16(2) - Filing of Papers by Facsimile
Transmission
Order 00-09
On Jan. 16, 2001, the court held a public hearing on a petition filed
on Aug. 31, 2000, by the Director of State Courts on the recommendation
of the Committee of Chief Judges and District Court Administrators
requesting the amendment of Wis. Stat. section 801.16(2) to provide the
maximum length of a facsimile transmission to be 15 pages, unless
exception is granted, and to clarify that papers filed by facsimile
transmission constitute the official record. The court has considered
the matters presented at the public hearing.
IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Wis.
Stat. section 751.12 and effective July 1, 2001, section 801.16
(2) (a), (b), and (c) of the statutes are amended to
read:
801.16 (2) (a) A
court may adopt a local rule, if it is approved by the chief judge, that
requires the use of a plain-paper facsimile machine and permits
the filing of those papers by facsimile transmission to
with the clerk of circuit court by facsimile transmission to a
plain-paper facsimile machine at a telephone number designated by the
court. To provide uniformity, any local rule shall specify a 15-page
limit for a facsimile transmission, unless an exception is approved by
the assigned judge or court commissioner on a case-by-case
basis.
(b) If no rule has been adopted under
par. (a), a the assigned judge or court
commissioner may permit a party or attorney in a specific matter to
file those papers with the clerk of circuit court by facsimile
transmission to a plain-paper facsimile machine at a telephone number
designated by the assigned judge or court commissioner.
(c) The If the facsimile
transmission exceeds 15 pages or is filed in the absence of a local
rule, the party or attorney, by filing papers by facsimile
transmission, certifies that permission of the shall certify that
the assigned judge or court for filing by facsimile transmission
has been granted commissioner has approved the facsimile
transmission.
(f) Papers filed by facsimile
transmission are considered filed when transmitted except that
papers filed by facsimile trans-mission completed after regular business
hours of the clerk of circuit court's office are considered filed
the next business day.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to
Wis. Stat. section 751.12 and effective July 1, 2001, section 801.16
(2) (d) and (e) of the statutes are created to
read:
(d) If papers are transmitted to a
plain-paper facsimile machine of a noncourt agency, party, or company
for the receipt, transmittal, and delivery to the clerk of circuit
court, the clerk of circuit court shall accept the papers for filing
only if the transmission complies with the local rule or has been
approved by the assigned judge or court commissioner and certified by
the party or attorney.
(e) Facsimile papers are considered filed
upon receipt by the clerk of circuit court and are the official record
of the court and may not be substituted. No additional copies may be
sent. The clerk of circuit court shall discard any duplicate papers
subsequently received by the clerk of circuit court, assigned judge, or
court commissioner.
IT IS ORDERED that notice of these
amendments to Wis. Stat. section 801.16 (2) be given by a single
publication of a copy of this order in the official state newspaper and
in an official publication of the State Bar of Wisconsin.
Dated at Madison, Wis., this 3rd day of
April, 2001.
By the court:
Cornelia G. Clark, Clerk of Court
Court Commissioners
In the Matter of Implementation of SCR 75, regarding Court
Commissioners
Order 00-12
On March 13, 2001, the court held a public hearing on the petition
filed on Sept. 15, 2000, by the Director of State Courts on the
recommendation of the Committee of Chief Judges and District Court
Administrators. The petitioners request amendment of the Supreme Court
Rules to require a statement of economic interest from all circuit court
commissioners and from authorized supplemental court commissioners who
have performed at least 40 hours of circuit court commissioner duties in
the preceding year, to omit the requirement that court commissioners
file a monthly certification of pending cases, and to clarify the legal
experience required for appointment as a court commissioner.
IT IS ORDERED that, effective the date
of this order, the Supreme Court Rules 60.05 (8), 60.07 (2), 70.36 (5),
and 75.02 (1) are amended as follows:
SECTION 1. 60.05 (8)
(b) of the Supreme Court Rules is amended to read:
60.05 (8) (b) Financial Reports
reports. Except as provided in SCR 60.07, a judge shall file with
the ethics board a timely financial report as required by section 19.43
of the statutes. The report shall also be filed by commissioners of the
supreme court, staff attorneys of the court of appeals, the director of
state courts, members of the board of attorneys professional
responsibility board of administrative oversight and preliminary
review committees, and members of the board of bar examiners.
Comment: The chapter does not prohibit a judge
from accepting honoraria or speaking fees provided that the compensation
is reasonable and commensurate with the task performed. A judge should
ensure, however, that no conflicts are created by the arrangement. A
judge must not appear to trade on the judicial position for personal
advantage. Nor should a judge spend significant time away from court
duties to meet speaking or writing commitments for compensation. In
addition, the source of the payment must not raise any question of undue
influence or the judge's ability or willingness to be impartial.
See SCR 60.05 (4) (e) and sec. 19.56,
Stats., regarding reporting of gifts and loans.
As provided in SCR 60.07 (2), sub. (8)
does not apply to a judge serving on a part-time basis. Sub. (8) does
not apply to a supplemental court commissioner authorized under SCR
75.02 (3) who has performed fewer than 40 hours of circuit court
commissioner duties in the preceding calendar year.
SECTION 2. 60.07 (2)*
of the Supreme Court Rules is amended to read:
60.07 (2) A judge who serves on a
part-time basis, including a reserve judge, a part-time municipal judge,
and or a part-time court commissioner, is not required to comply with
the following: SCR 60.05 (3) (a), (b), and (c) 1. b., 2. a. and c., (4)
(a) 1. b., (b), (c), (d), and (e), (5), (6), (7), and (8). All
circuit court commissioners appointed under SCR 75.02 (1) and those
supplemental court commissioners authorized under SCR 75.02 (3) who have
performed 40 hours or more of circuit court commissioner duties during
the preceding calendar year shall comply with SCR 60.05 (8).
SECTION 3. 70.36 (5)
(b) of the Supreme Court Rules is amended to read:
70.36 (5) (b) A circuit court
commissioner may should not routinely take matters under
advisement. Every circuit court commissioner shall decide any matter
within 30 days after the matter is submitted to him or her for decision.
If the circuit court commissioner is unable to decide a matter within 30
days, he or she shall notify the chief judge not later than 5 days
before the end of the 30-day period. The chief judge may extend the
period to decide the matter for an additional 30 days or may require the
circuit court commissioner to suspend all other assigned activities
until the decision is filed in the court.
SECTION 4. 70.36 (5)
(c) of the Supreme Court Rules is repealed.**
SECTION 5. 70.36 (5)
(d) of the Supreme Court Rules is amended to read:
70.36 (5) (d) The chief judge may
withdraw temporarily or permanently the circuit court commissioner's
appointment or authority to act if the commissioner fails to comply with
pars. par. (b) or (c).
SECTION 6. 75.02 (1)
of the Supreme Court Rules is amended to read:
75.02 (1) The chief judge of a judicial
administrative district shall appoint within the district, as authorized
by law, officers of the court to perform limited judicial and
quasi-judicial functions under the direction and authority of the chief
judge and judges of the circuit. These officers of the court shall be
selected on the basis of merit through a process approved by the chief
judge and the circuit court judges in the counties in which the officers
will serve. The chief judge may only appoint persons,
under this subsection, only persons who are licensed to
practice law in this state, and are in good
standing, with at least 3 years of legal experience and
who have been licensed to practice law in any state for 3 years
immediately before the appointment, except as otherwise provided by
statute.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that notice of
these amendments of the Supreme Court Rules be given by a single
publication of a copy of this order in the official state newspaper and
in an official publication of the State Bar of Wisconsin.
Dated at Madison, Wis., this 6th day of April, 2001.
By the court:
Cornelia G. Clark, Clerk of Court
*Bablitch, J. dissents.
**Bradley, J. dissents.
Mandatory Fee Arbitration
System
In the Matter of the Petition to Create a Mandatory Fee
Arbitration System
Order 00-15
On March 13, 2001, the court held a public hearing on a petition
filed on Sept. 25, 2000, requesting the court to adopt Supreme Court
Rules establishing a mandatory fee arbitration system for lawyer-client
fee disputes. The court has considered the matters presented at the
public hearing. The court expresses its appreciation to Attorney Gerald
Sternberg for presenting the petition and compiling the extensive
information in support thereof and to the State Bar of Wisconsin and the
Milwaukee County Bar Association for their efforts in commenting on the
petition and their ongoing efforts in conducting voluntary fee
arbitration programs. The court has determined a mandatory fee
arbitration system for lawyer-client fee disputes should not be adopted
at this time; the court will convene a committee to study mandatory and
voluntary fee arbitration programs.
IT IS ORDERED that the petition for the
adoption of rules for a mandatory fee arbitration system is denied.
Dated at Madison, Wis., this 6th day of
April, 2001.
By the court:
Cornelia G. Clark, Clerk of Court
Judicial Conference
In the Matter of the Amendment of the Supreme Court Rules:
SCR 70.15(1) - Judicial Conference
Order 01-09
The court, on its own motion, has deemed it advisable to amend the
Supreme Court Rule, SCR 70.15(1), setting forth the membership of the
Judicial Conference of Wisconsin to conform it with the bylaws of the
Judicial Conference, Article I, establishing the membership.
IT IS ORDERED that, effective the date
of this order, Supreme Court Rule 70.l5 (1) is amended to read:
70.15 (1) There is constituted the
judicial conference of Wisconsin, which consists of the justices of the
supreme court, the judges of the court of appeals, the judges of the
circuit court, reserve judges, three municipal court judges designated
by the Wisconsin municipal judges association, one circuit court
commissioner designated by the family court commissioner
association, one circuit court commissioner designated by the
judicial court commissioner association, and one judicial
representative of a non-Public Law 280 tribal court and two judicial
representatives of Public Law 280 tribal courts designated by the
Wisconsin tribal judges association.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that notice of
this amendment of the Supreme Court Rules be given by a single
publication of a copy of this order in the official state newspaper and
in an official publication of the State Bar of Wisconsin.
Dated at Madison, Wis., this 6th day of
April, 2001.
By the court:
Cornelia G. Clark, Clerk of Court
Wisconsin Lawyer