Reinstatement Proceedings of Mulligan
2017 WI 50, 5/18/17 (2017)
|
ATTORNEY reinstatement proceeding.
Reinstatement granted with conditions.
¶1 PER CURIAM. We review, pursuant to
Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 22.33(3), a report
filed by Referee James R. Erickson, Jr.,
recommending the court reinstate the license
of Thomas O. Mulligan to practice law in
Wisconsin, with conditions. After careful
review of the matter, we agree that Attorney
Mulligan's license should be reinstated,
with conditions. We also agree with the
referee that Attorney Mulligan should be
required to pay the full costs of this
reinstatement proceeding, which are
$2,267.95 as of March 8, 2017.
|
|
|
¶2 Attorney Mulligan was licensed to
practice law in Wisconsin in 1985 and is a
general practitioner in Spooner, Wisconsin.
He has previously been disciplined by this
court. He received private reprimands in
1997 and 2005, and received a court-imposed
public reprimand in 2009. In re
Disciplinary Proceedings Against Mulligan,
2009 WI 12, 315 Wis. 2d 605, 759 N.W.2d 766.
¶3 On October 8, 2015, following a
lengthy contested disciplinary proceeding,
this court suspended Attorney Mulligan's
license to practice law for nine months for
professional misconduct committed in two
client matters including failing to enter
into a fee agreement with his client,
failing to deposit fees in trust, making
cash disbursements out of his trust account,
commingling personal funds with trust funds,
and failing to maintain proper trust account
records. In re Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Mulligan, 2015 WI 96, 365 Wis. 2d
43, 870 N.W.2d 233. Our order directed
Attorney Mulligan to pay the Office of
Lawyer Regulation (OLR) the costs of that
proceeding. We also ordered that, as a
condition of reinstatement, Attorney
Mulligan attend and successfully complete an
OLR trust account seminar and, further, that
upon reinstatement, Attorney Mulligan's
trust account should be subject to
monitoring by the OLR for three years, or
until further order of the court.
¶4 On July 21, 2016, Attorney Mulligan
filed a petition seeking the reinstatement
of his license to practice law in Wisconsin.
The OLR filed a response on December 9, 2016
stating that it did not oppose Attorney
Mulligan's reinstatement but recommended,
consistent with this court's underlying
disciplinary order, that his reinstatement
be subject to the conditions outlined by
this court.
¶5 A public hearing was held on the
reinstatement proceeding on February 8,
2017. The referee filed his report and
recommendation on February 17, 2017.
|
|
|
¶6 Supreme Court Rule 22.31(1) provides
the standards to be met for reinstatement.
Specifically, Attorney Mulligan must show by
clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence
that he has the moral character to practice
law, that his resumption of the practice of
law will not be detrimental to the
administration of justice or subversive to
the public interest, and that he has
complied with SCR 22.26 and the terms of the
underlying disciplinary order. In addition
to these requirements, SCR 22.29(4)(a)-(4m)
provides additional requirements that a
petition for reinstatement must show. All
of these additional requirements are
effectively incorporated into SCR 22.31(1).
|
|
|
¶7 When we review a referee's report
and recommendation, we will adopt the
referee's findings of fact unless they are
clearly erroneous. Conclusions of law are
reviewed de novo. See In re
Disciplinary Proceedings Against
Eisenberg, 2004 WI 14, ¶5, 269 Wis. 2d 43,
675 N.W.2d 747.
¶8 The referee found that Attorney
Mulligan has not practiced law during the
period of his suspension; that he has fully
complied with the terms of the underlying
disciplinary order; that he has maintained
competence and learning in the law; that his
conduct since the suspension has been
exemplary and above reproach; and that he
has a proper understanding of and attitude
toward the standards that are imposed upon
members of the bar and will act in
conformity with those standards. The
referee found that Attorney Mulligan can
safely be recommended to the legal
profession, the courts, and the public as a
person fit to be consulted by others and to
represent them and otherwise act in matters
of trust and confidence and, in general, to
aid in the administration of justice as a
member of the bar and as an officer of the
courts. The referee also found that
Attorney Mulligan has fully complied with
the requirements set forth in SCR 22.26.
¶9 We note that Attorney Mulligan also
complied with this court's directive that he
attend a trust account management seminar
sponsored by the OLR.
¶10 The OLR received 12 letters
recommending Attorney Mulligan's
reinstatement, including letters from four
attorneys, a U.S. Border Patrol agent, a
medical doctor, and various clients,
professional acquaintances, and friends.
¶11 The record reflects that Attorney
Mulligan has not yet paid in full the
$17,720.02 for the costs of the underlying
disciplinary proceeding, but has provided
the OLR with information about his financial
circumstances and has made payment
arrangements with the OLR to satisfy his
obligation to pay those disciplinary costs.
Restitution was not ordered in the
underlying disciplinary proceeding.
|
|
|
¶12 The referee found that Attorney
Mulligan's reinstatement will be beneficial
to the public interest due to his commitment
to assisting community members in a rural,
underserved area of Wisconsin. Mindful of
the conditions this court imposed in its
underlying disciplinary order, the referee
recommends Attorney Mulligan's reinstatement
be subject to continued monitoring of his
trust account by the OLR for a period of
three years or until further order of the
court. He also recommended we impose the
costs of this reinstatement proceeding on
Attorney Mulligan.
¶13 We conclude that the referee's
findings support a determination that
Attorney Mulligan has met his burden to
establish by clear, satisfactory, and
convincing evidence that he has met all of
the standards required for reinstatement and
we agree that reinstatement is appropriate,
with conditions.
¶14 With respect to the cost of this
reinstatement proceeding, it is this court's
general practice to assess the full costs of
a proceeding against a respondent. See SCR
22.24(1m). We find no extraordinary
circumstances that would warrant a reduction
in the costs imposed and we find it
appropriate to assess the full costs of the
reinstatement proceeding against Attorney
Mulligan.
¶15 As is standard procedure, Attorney
Mulligan may contact the OLR to request a
payment plan that will enable Attorney
Mulligan to pay the full costs of this
proceeding in a matter consistent with his
financial ability.
¶16 IT IS ORDERED that within 60 days of
the date of this order, Thomas O. Mulligan
shall pay to the Office of Lawyer Regulation
the costs of this proceeding, which are
$2,267.95 as of March 8, 2017.
¶17 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the
license of Thomas O. Mulligan to practice
law in Wisconsin is reinstated, effective
the date of this order, subject to
monitoring of his trust account by the
Office of Lawyer Regulation for a period of
three years or until further order of this
court, and upon the condition that he
continue to make payments to the Office of
Lawyer Regulation toward the accumulated
costs assessed against him in this and the
prior disciplinary proceeding.
¶18 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that
compliance with all of the terms of this
order remain a condition of Thomas O.
Mulligan's license to practice law in
Wisconsin.
¶19 ANN WALSH BRADLEY AND ANNETTE
KINGLAND ZIEGLER, JJ., did not participate.
|
|
|