Office of Lawyer Regulation v. John M. Curtin

357 Wis. 2d 247 (2014) · Supreme Court of Wisconsin · July 24, 2014 · No. 2013AP2705-D

Summary

The Wisconsin Supreme Court reviewed a stipulation between the Office of Lawyer Regulation and John M. Curtin under SCR 22.12. The court imposed a public reprimand as reciprocal discipline for an Arizona reprimand involving inadequate trust-account records and failure to notify Wisconsin authorities of the Arizona discipline within the required period. No costs were assessed because the matter was resolved by stipulation without appointment of a referee.

Court
Supreme Court of Wisconsin
Writing for the Court
Per Curiam
Jurisdiction
Wisconsin
Decision date
July 24, 2014
Docket number
2013AP2705-D
Procedural posture
Attorney disciplinary proceeding in which the Wisconsin Supreme Court reviewed a stipulation between the Office of Lawyer Regulation and Attorney John M. Curtin seeking reciprocal discipline based on an Arizona Supreme Court reprimand.
Standard of review
Independent review of the SCR 22.12 stipulation and the proposed reciprocal discipline.
Precedential value
Published Wisconsin Supreme Court opinion
Parties
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. John M. Curtin
Disposition
other

Topics

appellate procedurestandard of review

Practice areas

legal ethicsattorney disciplineprofessional responsibility

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the court should accept the parties' stipulation under SCR 22.12.
  2. Whether Curtin should receive reciprocal Wisconsin discipline identical to the reprimand imposed by the Arizona Supreme Court.
  3. Whether costs should be assessed when the parties resolved the disciplinary matter by stipulation without appointment of a referee.

Holdings

  1. The court accepted the parties' stipulation under SCR 22.12 after independently reviewing the matter.
  2. Curtin was publicly reprimanded in Wisconsin as reciprocal discipline identical to that imposed by the Arizona Supreme Court.
  3. No costs were assessed because the matter was resolved by stipulation and no referee was appointed.

Key quotations

IT IS ORDERED that John M. Curtin is publicly reprimanded. (¶7)

Factual background

Curtin was admitted to practice law in Wisconsin and Arizona. After a staff member falsified, destroyed, and failed to maintain trust-account records to facilitate substantial theft from Curtin's trust account, the Arizona Supreme Court reprimanded Curtin for failing to maintain adequate records and meet required trust-account control and supervision standards. Curtin did not notify the Wisconsin Office of Lawyer Regulation of the Arizona reprimand within 20 days, although he later provided notice.

Procedural history

The Arizona Supreme Court reprimanded Curtin for inadequate trust-account recordkeeping and supervision and imposed a reprimand, one year of probation, and participation in a trust-account ethics program. The Office of Lawyer Regulation then filed a Wisconsin complaint alleging that Curtin was subject to reciprocal discipline and had violated SCR 22.22(1) by failing to notify the OLR of the Arizona reprimand within 20 days. The parties stipulated to a public reprimand, and the Wisconsin Supreme Court accepted the stipulation without appointing a referee and imposed the stipulated discipline without assessing costs.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…