Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Waters

2016 WI 15
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN
CASE NO.: 2015AP1649-D
COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against John O. Waters, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation,
Complainant,
v.
John O. Waters,
Respondent.
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST WATERS
OPINION FILED: March 9, 2016
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS:
ORAL ARGUMENT:
SOURCE OF APPEAL:
COURT:
COUNTY:
JUDGE:
JUSTICES:
CONCURRED:
DISSENTED:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ATTORNEYS:
2016 WI 15
NOTICE
This opinion is subject to further
editing and modification. The final
version will appear in the bound
volume of the official reports.
No. 2015AP1649-D
STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against John O. Waters, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation, FILED
Complainant,
MAR 9, 2016
v.
Diane M. Fremgen
Clerk of Supreme Court
John O. Waters,
Respondent.
ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney's license
suspended.
¶1 PER CURIAM. This is a reciprocal discipline matter.
On November 20, 2015, the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR)
filed an amended complaint and motion pursuant to Supreme Court
Rule (SCR) 22.22,1 requesting that this court suspend the license
1
SCR 22.22 (Reciprocal discipline) provides:
(1) An attorney on whom public discipline for
misconduct or a license suspension for medical
incapacity has been imposed by another jurisdiction
shall promptly notify the director of the matter.
(continued)
No. 2015AP1649-D
Failure to furnish the notice within 20 days of the
effective date of the order or judgment of the other
jurisdiction constitutes misconduct.
(2) Upon the receipt of a certified copy of a
judgment or order of another jurisdiction imposing
discipline for misconduct or a license suspension for
medical incapacity of an attorney admitted to the
practice of law or engaged in the practice of law in
this state, the director may file a complaint in the
supreme court containing all of the following:
(a) A certified copy of the judgment or order
from the other jurisdiction.
(b) A motion requesting an order directing the
attorney to inform the supreme court in writing within
20 days of any claim of the attorney predicated on the
grounds set forth in sub.(3) that the imposition of
the identical discipline or license suspension by the
supreme court would be unwarranted and the factual
basis for the claim.
(3) The supreme court shall impose the identical
discipline or license suspension unless one or more of
the following is present:
(a) The procedure in the other jurisdiction was
so lacking in notice or opportunity to be heard as to
constitute a deprivation of due process.
(b) There was such an infirmity of proof
establishing the misconduct or medical incapacity that
the supreme court could not accept as final the
conclusion in respect to the misconduct or medical
incapacity,
(c) The misconduct justifies substantially
different discipline in this state.
(4) Except as provided in sub.(3), a final
adjudication in another jurisdiction that an attorney
has engaged in misconduct or has a medical incapacity
shall be conclusive evidence of the attorney's
misconduct or medical incapacity for purposes of a
proceeding under this rule.
(continued)
2
No. 2015AP1649-D
of Attorney John O. Waters for a period of three years as
reciprocal discipline identical to that imposed by the State of
Michigan Attorney Discipline Board.2
¶2 Attorney Waters was admitted to practice law in
Wisconsin in 2002. He is also admitted to practice law in
Michigan. Attorney Waters' Wisconsin law license is currently
suspended for non-compliance with continuing legal education
reporting requirements, failure to pay State Bar of Wisconsin
dues, and failure to submit the required trust account
certification to the State Bar.
¶3 The OLR's amended complaint noted that on June 19,
2013, the State of Michigan Attorney Discipline Board suspended
Attorney Waters' Michigan law license for three years, with a
retroactive commencement of September 14, 2012, based on a
(5) The supreme court may refer a complaint filed
under sub. (2) to a referee for a hearing and a report
and recommendation pursuant to SCR 22.16. At the
hearing, the burden is on the party seeking the
imposition of discipline or license suspension
different from that imposed in the other jurisdiction
to demonstrate that the imposition of identical
discipline or license suspension by the supreme court
is unwarranted.
(6) If the discipline or license suspension
imposed in the other jurisdiction has been stayed, any
reciprocal discipline or license suspension imposed by
the supreme court shall be held in abeyance until the
stay expires.
2
The OLR filed a complaint on August 13, 2015. The
complaint was subsequently amended to include as Exhibit A
copies of supporting documentation from the Michigan Supreme
Court.
3
No. 2015AP1649-D
consent stipulation consolidating multiple proceedings.
Restitution and conditions were also imposed.
¶4 The following facts are taken from the documents
attached to the OLR's amended complaint relating to the Michigan
disciplinary proceedings. The Michigan suspension was based on
Attorney Waters' September 14, 2012 conviction for felony drug
offenses, as well as a disciplinary complaint comprised of three
separate counts of professional misconduct. These included:
neglect of a legal matter entrusted to him, in violation of
Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct (MRPC) 1.1(c); failing to
act with reasonable diligence, in violation of MRPC 1.3; failing
to adequately communicate with his client, in violation of MRPC
1.4(a); failing to refund unearned fees or release the client
file upon being discharged from the representation of a client,
in violation of MRPC 1.16(d); engaging in conduct prejudicial to
the proper administration of justice, in violation of MRPC
8.4(c) and Michigan Court Rule (MCR) 9.104(1); engaging in
conduct which exposes the legal profession or the courts to
obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach, in violation of MCR
9.104(2); engaging in conduct contrary to justice, ethics, or
good morals, in violation of MCR 9.104(3); intentionally failing
to respond to a lawful demand for information from a
disciplinary authority, in violation of MRPC 8.1(a)(2); and
failing to answer a request for investigation, in violation of
MCR 9.104(7) and MCR 9.113(A) and (B)(2).
4
No. 2015AP1649-D
¶5 The OLR noted that Attorney Waters failed to notify
the OLR of the Michigan suspension within 20 days of the
effective date of the order, as required under SCR 22.22(1).
¶6 The OLR asks this court to suspend Attorney Waters'
Wisconsin law license for three years as discipline reciprocal
to that imposed in Michigan, to order him to comply with
Michigan's order of restitution, with conditions, and to impose
costs.
¶7 On November 24, 2015, this court directed Attorney
Waters to inform the court in writing within 20 days of any
claim by him, predicated upon the grounds set forth in
SCR 22.22(3), that the imposition of discipline reciprocal to
that imposed in Michigan would be unwarranted, and of the
factual basis for any such claim. No response was received.
¶8 Under SCR 22.22(3), in reciprocal discipline matters,
this court shall impose the identical discipline unless one of
the exceptions enumerated in the rule is shown. There is no
indication that any of those exceptions apply in this case.
Therefore, we impose discipline identical to that imposed by the
State of Michigan Attorney Discipline Board.
¶9 We also agree that Attorney Waters shall pay the full
costs of this proceeding. Attorney Waters has not identified
any factors that would justify a reduction in costs. See
SCR 22.24(1m). He is also directed to comply with the
restitution order imposed by the State of Michigan Attorney
Discipline Board. Grievance Administrator v. John Oren Waters,
Case Nos. 12-101-AI; 12-140-JC; 13-47-GA.
5
No. 2015AP1649-D
¶10 IT IS ORDERED that the license of John O. Waters to
practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period of three
years, effective the date of this order.
¶11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date
of this order, John O. Waters shall pay to the Office of Lawyer
Regulation the costs of this proceeding.
¶12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent he has not
already done so, John O. Waters shall comply with the provisions
of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of a person whose license to
practice law in Wisconsin has been suspended.
¶13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that compliance with all
conditions of this order, as well as compliance with all
conditions of the disciplinary orders imposed on him by the
State of Michigan Attorney Discipline Board, is required for
reinstatement. See SCR 22.29(4)(c).
6
No. 2015AP1649-D
1