|
|
|
Vol. 74, No. 7, July 2001
|
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.
Public Reprimand
of John E. Raftery
John E. Raftery, 56, Sheboygan, has been publicly reprimanded.
Raftery had represented a client for many years. In about 1994, the client
was attempting to sell a timeshare and consulted with Raftery regarding
the sale. Raftery offered to purchase the timeshare himself and paid the
client the $2,500 purchase price. Raftery agreed to prepare and register
the appropriate documents to transfer title to the property, but he failed
to do so.
The client subsequently received bills for timeshare maintenance fees,
which he turned over to Raftery. Raftery assured him that he would take
care of the bills, but in early 1999, the client received collection notices
for unpaid maintenance fees. Raftery failed to respond to phone calls
and letters from the client. In May 1999, although Raftery negotiated
a compromise settlement with the timeshare owners for the outstanding
fees and made a payment of $1,500, he still did not prepare any transfer
documents.
When the client filed a grievance, Raftery failed to respond to two requests
for a written response. Raftery also failed to respond to an initial inquiry
from a committee investigator, but did subsequently cooperate with the
committee's investigation. The Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility
voted to publicly reprimand Raftery on the condition that he conclude
the timeshare transaction. Raftery eventually accomplished the transfer
in early 2001.
Raftery was publicly reprimanded for entering into a business transaction
with a client without giving the client a reasonable opportunity to seek
the advice of independent counsel or obtaining the client's written consent
to the transaction, contrary to SCR 20:1.8(a)(2)&(3); failing to act with
reasonable diligence and promptness in preparing the transfer documents,
contrary to SCR 20:1.3; failing to respond to the client's reasonable
attempts to communicate, contrary to SCR 20:1.4(a); and failing to cooperate
with the grievance investigation, contrary to SCR 22.07 (1999).
|