Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Melinda R. Alfredson

2022 WI 33SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN
CASE NO.: 2021AP1106-D
COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against
Melinda R. Alfredson, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation,
Complainant,
v.
Melinda R. Alfredson,
Respondent.
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ALFREDSON
OPINION FILED: May 25, 2022
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS:
ORAL ARGUMENT:
SOURCE OF APPEAL:
COURT:
COUNTY:
JUDGE:
JUSTICES:
Per Curiam.
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ATTORNEYS:
2022 WI 33NOTICE
This opinion is subject to further
editing and modification. The final
version will appear in the bound
volume of the official reports.
No. 2021AP1106-D
STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Melinda R. Alfredson,
Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation,
FILED
Complainant, MAY 25, 2022
v. Sheila T. Reiff
Clerk of Supreme Court
Melinda R. Alfredson,
Respondent.
ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney's license
suspended.
¶1 PER CURIAM. We review the report of the referee, the
Honorable Sue E. Bischel, recommending that the court suspend
the Wisconsin law license of Attorney Melinda R. Alfredson for
one year, order her to pay restitution to a former client, and
order her to pay the full costs of this disciplinary proceeding.
Neither party has appealed from the referee's report and
No. 2021AP1106-D
recommendation, and thus our review proceeds under Supreme Court
Rule (SCR) 22.17(2).1
¶2 We agree that Attorney Alfredson's professional
misconduct warrants a one-year suspension and an order directing
her to pay restitution to her former client. We further agree
that Attorney Alfredson should pay the full costs of this
proceeding, which total $2,552.11 as of March 14, 2022.
¶3 Attorney Alfredson was admitted to practice law in
Wisconsin in 2009. She has been the subject of two prior
attorney disciplinary proceedings. In 2017, Attorney
Alfredson's law license was suspended for 60 days after she was
found to have committed 16 counts of professional misconduct
arising out of her representation of two clients, various trust
account violations, and her failure to cooperate with the Office
of Lawyer Regulation's (OLR) investigation. In re Disciplinary
Proceedings Against Alfredson, 2017 WI 6, 373 Wis. 2d 79, 890
N.W.2d 13. In 2019, Attorney Alfredson's law license was
suspended for 90 days, for having committed six counts of
misconduct arising out of her representation of two clients,
trust account violations, and her failure to cooperate with the
1 SCR 22.17(2) provides:
If no appeal is filed timely, the supreme court
shall review the referee's report; adopt, reject or
modify the referee's findings and conclusions or
remand the matter to the referee for additional
findings; and determine and impose appropriate
discipline. The court, on its own motion, may order
the parties to file briefs in the matter.
2
No. 2021AP1106-D
OLR's investigation. In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against
Alfredson, 2019 WI 17, 385 Wis. 2d 565, 923 N.W.2d 869.
¶4 On June 29, 2021, the OLR filed a complaint alleging
seven counts of professional misconduct in connection with her
representation of L.P. L.P. retained Attorney Alfredson in
April of 2018 to prepare the documentation to permit L.P. to
serve as power of attorney for her son, J.P., and to reclaim
funds alleged to be owed to J.P. by his employer. Attorney
Alfredson was also retained to answer L.P.'s questions related
to a criminal case involving J.P. J.P. was represented by
another attorney in the criminal case. L.P. paid Attorney
Alfredson a $1,500 advanced fee. There was no written fee
agreement and Attorney Alfredson did not deposit the $1,500
advanced fee into a trust account.
¶5 On May 22, 2018, Attorney Alfredson's law license was
suspended for noncompliance with mandatory continuing legal
education (CLE) requirements. Her law license was not
reinstated until November 28, 2018. During the period her law
license was suspended, Attorney Alfredson provided legal
services to L.P, as evidenced by billing invoices dated July 8,
2018. Attorney Alfredson also failed to provide L.P. with an
itemized billing, despite L.P.'s request.
¶6 On September 1, 2018, L.P. asked Attorney Alfredson to
commence legal proceedings against J.P.'s employer. The
following month, L.P requested a status update and Attorney
Alfredson informed L.P. the case had been filed in small claims
court and later claimed that a hearing was scheduled on December
3
No. 2021AP1106-D
19, 2018. Attorney Alfredson's representations to L.P were
false. Attorney Alfredson never filed the small claims case or
scheduled the hearing. She also falsely mislead L.P into
believing that Attorney Alfredson was busy "in court" at various
times.
¶7 On February 26, 2019, in a proceeding unrelated to
L.P., this court suspended Attorney Alfredson's law license for
90 days, effective April 9, 2019. In re Disciplinary
Proceedings Against Alfredson, 385 Wis. 2d 565. The day after
our opinion issued, Attorney Alfredson was entered as counsel of
record for J.P. in a family law case. Attorney Alfredson never
informed L.P that her law license had been suspended, and did
not provide written notification to the court, or to opposing
counsel of her inability to act as an attorney for J.P. due to
her April suspension. On June 16, 2020, Attorney Alfredson's
law license was again suspended for noncompliance with 2018-2019
mandatory CLE requirements. It remains suspended.
¶8 The OLR's complaint alleged the following counts of
misconduct:
Count 1: By failing to communicate to L.P in writing
the scope of her representation or the basis or rate
of her fee or expenses for which L.P would be
responsible; and by failing to communicate to L.P. in
writing the purpose and effect of the advanced fees
that were paid to her, Attorney Alfredson violated
SCR 20:1.5(b)(1)2 and SCR 20:1.5(b)(2).3
2 SCR 20:1.5(b)(1) provides:
The scope of the representation and the basis or
rate of the fee and expenses for which the client will
be responsible shall be communicated to the client in
4
No. 2021AP1106-D
Count 2: By depositing the $1,500 advanced fee payment
into her personal account rather than a client trust
account, Attorney Alfredson violated
SCR 20:1.15(b)(1).4
Count 3: By failing to file a small claims court
action against J.P.'s employer, Attorney Alfredson
violated SCR 20:1.3.5
Count 4: By failing to keep L.P. reasonably informed
regarding the status of the small claims court action,
Attorney Alfredson violated SCR 20:1.4(a)(3).6
writing, before or within a reasonable time after
commencing the representation, except when the lawyer
will charge a regularly represented client on the same
basis or rate as in the past. If it is reasonably
foreseeable that the total cost of representation to
the client, including attorney's fees, will be $1000
or less, the communication may be oral or in writing.
Any changes in the basis or rate of the fee or
expenses shall also be communicated in writing to the
client.
3 SCR 20:1.5(b)(2) provides: "If the total cost of
representation to the client, including attorney's fees, is more
than $1000, the purpose and effect of any retainer or advance
fee that is paid to the lawyer shall be communicated in
writing."
4 SCR 20:1.15(b)(1) provides:
A lawyer shall hold in trust, separate from the
lawyer's own property, that property of clients and
3rd parties that is in the lawyer's possession in
connection with a representation. All funds of clients
and 3rd parties paid to a lawyer or law firm in
connection with a representation shall be deposited in
one or more identifiable trust accounts.
5 SCR 20:1.3 provides: "A lawyer shall act with reasonable
diligence and promptness in representing a client."
6 SCR 20:1.4(a)(3) provides: "A lawyer shall keep the
client reasonably informed about the status of the matter."
5
No. 2021AP1106-D
Count 5: By misleading L.P. that she was in court
representing other clients, when she was purportedly
in court observing random cases, and by informing L.P.
that she had filed a small claims court action, when
in fact she had not done so, in each instance,
Attorney Alfredson violated SCR 20:8.4(c).7
Count 6: By providing legal counsel to L.P. while
subject to a CLE and a disciplinary suspension,
Attorney Alfredson violated SCR 31.10(1)8 and
SCR 22.26(2), enforceable via SCR 20:8.4(f).
9 10
7 SCR 20:8.4(c) provides: "It is professional misconduct
for a lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud,
deceit or misrepresentation."
8 SCR 31.10(1) provides:
If a lawyer fails to comply with the attendance
requirement of SCR 31.02, fails to comply with the
reporting requirement of SCR 31.03(1), or fails to pay
the late fee under SCR 31.03(2), the board shall serve
a notice of noncompliance on the lawyer. This notice
shall advise the lawyer that the lawyer’s state bar
membership shall be automatically suspended for
failing to file evidence of compliance or to pay the
late fee within 60 days after service of the notice.
The board shall certify the names of all lawyers so
suspended under this rule to the clerk of the supreme
court, all supreme court justices, all court of
appeals and circuit court judges, all circuit court
commissioners appointed under SCR 75.02(1) in this
state, all circuit court clerks, all juvenile court
clerks, all registers in probate, the executive
director of the state bar of Wisconsin, the Wisconsin
State Public Defender’s Office, and the clerks of the
federal district courts in Wisconsin. A lawyer shall
not engage in the practice of law in Wisconsin while
his or her state bar membership is suspended under
this rule.
9 SCR 22.26(2) provides:
An attorney whose license to practice law is
suspended or revoked or who is suspended from the
practice of law may not engage in this state in the
practice of law or in any law work activity
customarily done by law students, law clerks, or other
6
No. 2021AP1106-D
Count 7: By failing to provide written notification to
the court and the attorney for each party in In Re:
the Support or Maintenance of, Brown County Case No.
2013FA862 of her disciplinary suspension and her
consequent inability to act as an attorney following
the April 9, 2019, [suspension order], Attorney
Alfredson violated SCR 22.26(1)(c),11 enforceable via
SCR 20:8.4(f).
¶9 Attorney Alfredson admitted service of the OLR
complaint and initially, it appeared that the parties would
resolve this matter by stipulation. However, Attorney Alfredson
failed to timely sign and return the proposed stipulation. This
court appointed Referee Bischel and the OLR asked the referee to
enter a default judgment. The referee issued a scheduling order
affording Attorney Alfredson an opportunity to move to extend
her time to file an answer, but warned Attorney Alfredson that
paralegal personnel, except that the attorney may
engage in law related work in this state for a
commercial employer itself not engaged in the practice
of law
10 SCR 20:8.4(f) provides: "It is professional misconduct
for a lawyer to violate a statute, supreme court order or
supreme court decision regulating the conduct of lawyers."
11 SCR 22.26(1)(c) provides:
On or before the effective date of license
suspension or revocation, an attorney whose license is
suspended or revoked shall promptly provide written
notification to the court or administrative agency and
the attorney for each party in a matter pending before
a court or administrative agency of the suspension or
revocation and of the attorney's consequent inability
to act as an attorney following the effective date of
the suspension or revocation. The notice shall
identify the successor attorney of the attorney's
client or, if there is none at the time notice is
given, shall state the client's place of residence.
7
No. 2021AP1106-D
such a motion must be accompanied by an affidavit setting forth
facts establishing good cause for her failure to timely answer.
On the afternoon of the deadline, Attorney Alfredson moved to
extend the deadline, but her motion was not accompanied by an
answer. The OLR objected to further extensions. The referee
considered the motion and supporting affidavit and determined
that Attorney Alfredson had failed to establish good cause for
her failure to file an answer for more than six months.
Accordingly, the referee denied Attorney Alfredson's motion and
declared her in default.
¶10 The referee then found that the allegations of the
complaint were unrefuted and that the OLR had proven the factual
allegations of the complaint as to all seven counts, and
concluded that the uncontested allegations establish that
Attorney Alfredson violated each of the Supreme Court Rules as
alleged in the OLR complaint.
¶11 The referee thoroughly considered the appropriate
discipline, taking into account the seriousness, nature, and
extent of Attorney Alfredson's misconduct, the level of
discipline needed to protect the public, and the need to impress
upon Attorney Alfredson the seriousness of her misconduct and to
deter other attorneys from committing similar misconduct. The
referee considered Attorney Alfredson's misconduct to be serious
and extensive and reflecting "total disregard for Supreme Court
Rules." Given her previous misconduct, the referee deemed
increased progressive discipline "obviously necessary" to
protect the public.
8
No. 2021AP1106-D
¶12 The referee identified several aggravating factors,
including but not limited to Attorney Alfredson's false
statements, and determined that the imposition of a one-year
suspension of Attorney Alfredson's license is appropriate and
generally consistent with similar cases. See, e.g., In re
Disciplinary Proceedings Against Maynard, 2014 WI 13, 352
Wis. 2d 629, 845 N.W.2d 648 (imposing one-year suspension on
attorney who committed analogous misconduct who had previously
received a 90-day suspension); In re Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Dumke, 216 Wis. 2d 475, 574 N.W.2d 241 (1998) (imposing
one-year suspension on attorney who committed analogous
misconduct who had previously received a six-month suspension).
¶13 The referee thus recommended a one-year suspension of
Attorney Alfredson's license, restitution of $250 to L.P., and
that Attorney Alfredson be held responsible for the full costs
of this disciplinary proceeding, which total $2,552.11 as of
March 14, 2022.
¶14 No appeal was filed, so we review this matter pursuant
to SCR 22.17(2). We will affirm the referee's findings of fact
unless they are clearly erroneous. We review conclusions of law
de novo. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Eisenberg,
2004 WI 14, ¶5, 269 Wis. 2d 43, 675 N.W.2d 747. We may impose
whatever sanction we see fit, regardless of the referee's
recommendation. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against
Widule, 2003 WI 34, ¶44, 261 Wis. 2d 45, 660 N.W.2d 686.
¶15 There is no showing that any of the referee's findings
of fact are clearly erroneous, and we adopt them. We also agree
9
No. 2021AP1106-D
with the referee's legal conclusion that Attorney Alfredson
violated the Supreme Court Rules noted above. We previously
warned Attorney Alfredson "that the court may impose
progressively severe sanctions when an attorney engages in
repeated misconduct." In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against
Alfredson, 2019 WI 17, ¶29, 385 Wis. 2d 565, 923 N.W.2d 869.
Attorney Alfredson is now back before us a third time and
progressive discipline is clearly merited. In re Disciplinary
Proceedings Against Netzer, 2014 WI 7, ¶49, 352 Wis. 2d 310, 841
N.W.2d 820 ("[t]his court has long adhered to the concept of
progressive discipline in attorney regulatory cases.") We agree
that a one-year suspension and restitution of $250 to L.P is
appropriate. As is our normal practice, we find it appropriate
to impose the full costs of this disciplinary proceeding on
Attorney Alfredson. See SCR 22.24(1m).
¶16 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Melinda R. Alfredson
is suspended for a period of one year, effective the date of
this order.
¶17 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date
of this order, Melinda R. Alfredson shall pay $250 in
restitution to L.P.
¶18 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the restitution specified
above is to be completed prior to paying costs to the Office of
Lawyer Regulation.
¶19 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date
of this order, Melinda R. Alfredson shall pay to the Office of
10
No. 2021AP1106-D
Lawyer Regulation the costs of this proceeding, which are
$2,552.11 as of March 14, 2022.
¶20 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Melinda R. Alfredson 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.
¶21 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that compliance with all
conditions of this order is required for reinstatement. See
SCR 22.28(2).
11
No. 2021AP1106-D
1