Disciplinary Proceedings Against Woods
2009 WI 7, 315 Wis. 2d 282, 759 N.W. 2d 322 (2009)
|
ATTORNEY disciplinary
proceeding. Attorney's license suspended.
|
|
|
¶1 PER CURIAM. On March 5, 2008, the
Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) filed a
complaint alleging Attorney Terrence J.
Woods committed six counts of professional
misconduct in connection with representing a
client in a personal injury lawsuit and for
failure to file and/or pay certain state
income taxes. The parties executed a joint
stipulation, so we consider the OLR
complaint and the parties' stipulation
without the appointment of a referee
pursuant to SCR 22.12(1). After careful
consideration, we adopt the stipulation of
the parties and agree that the seriousness
of Attorney Woods' misconduct warrants the
suspension of his license to practice law in
Wisconsin for a period of one year to run
consecutive to his current suspension
imposed by this court in July 2008. We
further agree that Attorney Woods should pay
the costs of this proceeding.
¶2 Attorney Woods was admitted to
practice law in Wisconsin in 1965. Attorney
Woods' license to practice law in Wisconsin
is currently suspended and he has been
disciplined by this court on several
previous occasions.
|
|
|
¶3 In 1993 Attorney Woods received a
public reprimand for failing to properly
pursue an appeal on behalf of two criminal
defendants. See Public Reprimand of
Terrence J. Woods, 1993-2.
¶4 In 1996 Attorney Woods consented to
a private reprimand for settling a case
without his client's knowledge or consent
and for refusing to return documents and
property belonging to his client. See
Private Reprimand of Terrence J. Woods, 1996-
1.
¶5 In 1998 this court suspended
Attorney Woods for 60 days for misconduct
that included failure to keep his clients
informed of the status of their matters,
failure to return property, failure to act
with reasonable diligence in pursuing his
clients' interests, failure to communicate
with his clients, and failure to cooperate
with the Board of Attorneys Professional
Responsibility's investigation into his
misconduct. See In re Disciplinary
Proceedings Against Woods, 216 Wis. 2d
137,
573 N.W.2d 838 (1998).
¶6 Later in 1998 Attorney Woods was
again suspended for 60 days for failure to
act diligently on his client's behalf and
failure to properly inform his client of the
status of the case. See In re
Disciplinary
Proceedings Against Woods, 221 Wis. 2d
230,
583 N.W.2d 650 (1998).
¶7 In 2003 Attorney Woods received a
public reprimand for misconduct committed in
connection with a possible small claims
action over unpaid vacation compensation and
for failure to inform his client that he
would not pursue a worker's compensation
claim on her behalf after leading her to
believe that he would pursue the claim.
See
Public Reprimand of Terrence J. Woods, 2003-
11.
¶8 Most recently, in July 2008, this
court suspended Attorney Woods' license to
practice law for 90 days for professional
misconduct committed in the context of a
bankruptcy proceeding and a divorce
proceeding. OLR v. Woods, 2008 WI 79,
311
Wis. 2d 213, 751 N.W.2d 840. Again, his
license remains suspended.
¶9 The present disciplinary matter
involves misconduct committed in the context
of representing a client in a fee dispute
and misconduct relating to Attorney Woods'
own failure to file and/or pay state income
taxes.
IN THE MATTER OF D.B.
¶10 In 2001 D.B. was involved in an
automobile accident. In November 2002 D.B.
and her husband contacted Attorney Woods
because their insurance company had declined
to pay D.B.'s chiropractor bills. Attorney
Woods agreed to represent D.B., and D.B.
signed a contingent fee agreement with
Attorney Woods.
¶11 Attorney Woods did not file a
lawsuit on behalf of D.B. until one day
before the applicable statute of limitations
expired. Then, Attorney Woods failed to
serve the defendants with an authenticated
copy of the summons and complaint as
required by Wis. Stat. § 801.02(2).
Accordingly, the circuit court scheduled a
hearing to dismiss the lawsuit on January
11, 2005. Attorney Woods failed to advise
D.B. of this hearing. Attorney Woods
attended the dismissal hearing, and the
lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice on
January 11, 2005, because of Attorney Woods'
failure to serve an authenticated copy of
the summons and complaint. Attorney Woods
failed to notify D.B. that her case was
dismissed. Several times after the January
11, 2005, hearing, D.B. spoke with Attorney
Woods about her lawsuit, and each time
Attorney Woods told her that her case was
proceeding normally.
¶12 D.B.'s father died in the fall of
2006. At that time, she learned that
Attorney Woods was handling her father's
estate. D.B. spoke with Attorney Woods
several times about her personal injury
lawsuit as well as her father's estate. At
no time did Attorney Woods inform D.B. that
her lawsuit had been dismissed.
¶13 In November 2006 D.B. informed
Attorney Woods that she had learned her
lawsuit had been dismissed. She attempted
to arrange a meeting with Attorney Woods to
discuss the matter, but Attorney Woods
failed to appear at the meeting.
¶14 In January 2007 D.B. retained
Attorney Brian Maloney to pursue a legal
malpractice action against Attorney Woods.
Attorney Maloney requested D.B.'s file but
Attorney Woods failed to respond to these
requests and did not make D.B.'s file
available until he was deposed in June
2007.
¶15 Based on the foregoing, the OLR
complaint alleged and the parties later
stipulated as follows:
|
|
By failing to file a personal injury
lawsuit until the day before the expiration
of the statute of limitations and, in
addition, in failing to serve the defendants
in such lawsuit with an authenticated copy
of the summons and complaint within 90 days
after filing, resulting in the dismissal of
the lawsuit with prejudice, Attorney Woods
failed to act with reasonable diligence and
promptness in representing his clients, in
violation of SCR 20:1.3.
|
|
By failing to inform D.B. that the
defendants had filed a motion to dismiss the
lawsuit, and that the court had scheduled a
hearing on defendants' motion to dismiss
and, in addition, by failing to inform D.B.
of the court's order dismissing the lawsuit
with prejudice, Attorney Woods failed to
keep his clients reasonably informed about
the status of their case, in violation of
former SCR 20:1.4(a).
|
|
By failing to explain to D.B. the
ramifications of the dismissal of the
lawsuit with prejudice at any time from
January 11, 2005, through November 29, 2006,
Attorney Woods deprived his client of the
ability to make informed decisions regarding
the representation and thereby violated SCR
20:1.4(b).
|
|
By failing to respond to successor
counsel's requests for D.B.'s file, Attorney
Woods failed to take steps to protect his
clients' interests, such as surrendering
their file, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d).
|
|
By failing to inform D.B. of the
dismissal of the lawsuit, notwithstanding
multiple direct inquiries to Attorney Woods
concerning the status of their case made
after the dismissal with prejudice of the
suit, Attorney Woods violated SCR 20:8.4
(c).
STATE INCOME TAX MATTERS
¶16 In August 2007 the Department of
Revenue (DOR) advised the OLR that Attorney
Woods had failed to file state income tax
returns and owed delinquent state income
tax, state withholding tax, and state
business tax registration fees to the DOR.
Initially, the DOR advised the OLR that
Attorney Woods' estimated tax liability
totaled $430,338.80.
¶17 Attorney Woods responded to the OLR
inquiry regarding the alleged income tax
liabilities denying that he owed
$430,338.80, but admitting that he had been
working with an accountant to address his
state withholding tax issue and his tax
liability. In November 2007 the DOR
reported to the OLR that Attorney Woods' tax
liability was $208,478.76.
|
|
|
¶18 Based on the foregoing, the OLR
alleged and the parties later stipulated
that Attorney Woods violated SCR 20:8.4(f)
by:
Failing to file Wisconsin state income
tax returns with the Department of Revenue
for the tax period(s) 1996, 1997, 1998,
1999, 2004, 2005, and 2006.
Failing to pay income taxes to the
Department of Revenue for the tax years
1996, 1997, 1998, and 1999.
Failing to pay withholding taxes for the
tax years 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, May
through December 2001, 2002, September
through December 2003, and June 2004.
Failing to file withholding tax returns
for 1997, 2004, 2005, 2006, and for January
through June 2007.
Failing to pay business tax registration
fees for 1999, 2001, 2003, and 2005.
Failing to satisfy tax warrants issued
against him by the Department of Revenue for
the years 1998 through 2007.
¶19 As part of the stipulation, Attorney
Woods admitted he owes monies to the DOR,
but contends the amount he owes is
substantially less than what DOR claims.
¶20 Attorney Woods acknowledged that the
stipulation was made knowingly and
voluntarily and represents his admission of
the misconduct charged in the disciplinary
complaint and his assent to the level of
discipline sought by the OLR.
¶21 With respect to the appropriate
level of discipline, the parties agreed that
a one-year suspension was appropriate and
that the suspension should be imposed
consecutive to Attorney Woods' current
suspension imposed in July 2008. The OLR
explicitly advised the court that the
recommended discipline was not the result of
negotiations.
|
|
|
¶22 SCR 22.12(2) provides that if this
court approves a stipulation, it shall adopt
the stipulated facts and conclusions of law
and impose the stipulated discipline. SCR
22.12(3) provides that if this court rejects
the stipulation, a referee will be appointed
and the matter shall proceed as a complaint
filed without a stipulation.
¶23 We adopt the stipulated facts and
conclusions of law. We now turn to the
recommended discipline.
¶24 Attorney Woods has an extensive
disciplinary history. Attorney Woods'
misconduct in this matter seriously
compromised the legal rights of his client,
D.B. Upon review of the stipulation, this
court questioned whether the proposed one-
year suspension was inadequate under the
circumstances, particularly given Attorney
Woods' extensive disciplinary history.
Accordingly, this court issued an order
directing the parties to justify the
recommendation for discipline contained in
the parties' stipulation.
|
|
|
¶25 Both parties filed written
responses. The OLR provided this court with
a 14-page detailed memorandum which analyzed
some 11 disciplinary cases involving neglect
of client matters. The OLR advised the
court that typically, the misconduct alleged
in this complaint would warrant a suspension
in the range of 60 to 90 days. The OLR also
analyzed nine disciplinary cases involving
failure to file income tax returns or pay
income tax liabilities. Absent his
extensive disciplinary history, Attorney
Woods' misconduct in this matter would
likely warrant a suspension of his license
to practice law in Wisconsin for a period of
90 days to six months. Here, however, the
OLR was mindful that Attorney Woods'
previous disciplinary history is a
significant aggravating factor justifying a
more lengthy suspension.
¶26 Upon review of the OLR's statement
in support of the stipulation, this court is
persuaded that a one-year suspension of
Attorney Woods' license to practice law in
Wisconsin——imposed consecutive to his
current suspension——is adequate discipline
for the misconduct committed in this
matter. Therefore,
¶27 IT IS ORDERED that the license of
Terrence J. Woods to practice law in
Wisconsin is suspended for a period of one
year, effective the date of this order. The
suspension shall run consecutive to the 90-
day suspension imposed by this court in
OLR v. Woods, 2008 WI 79, 311 Wis. 2d
213, 751 N.W.2d 840
¶28 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Terrence
J. Woods shall comply with the requirements
of SCR 22.26 pertaining to activities
following suspension if he has not already
done so.
¶29 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60
days of the date of this order, Terrence J.
Woods shall pay to the Office of Lawyer
Regulation the costs of this proceeding. If
the costs are not paid within the time
specified and absent a showing to this court
of his inability to pay the costs within
that time, the license of Terrence J. Woods
to practice law in Wisconsin shall remain
suspended until further order of the court.
|
|
|