Disciplinary Proceedings Against Cummings
2017AP1255, 01/19/18 (2018)
|
ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding.
Attorney's license suspended.
¶1 PER CURIAM. In this disciplinary
matter we are asked to determine whether
Attorney Michael Leslie Cummings' license to
practice law in Wisconsin should be
suspended for a period of six months, as
discipline reciprocal to that imposed by the
Supreme Court of Illinois.
¶2 After reviewing this matter, we
conclude that Attorney Cummings' license to
practice law in this state should be
suspended for a period of six months. In
light of the fact that Attorney Cummings has
not contested the OLR's complaint and there
has not been a need for the appointment of a
referee, we do not impose the costs of this
proceeding on Attorney Cummings.
¶3 The Office of Lawyer Regulation
(OLR) initiated this proceeding by filing a
complaint, an order to answer, and a motion
pursuant to Supreme Court Rule (SCR)
22.22(3), requesting the court to order
Attorney Cummings to show cause, in writing,
why the imposition of discipline identical
to that imposed in Illinois would be
unwarranted. The OLR's complaint contained
two counts: (1) that Attorney Cummings is
subject to discipline reciprocal to a six-
month suspension in Illinois and (2) that
Attorney Cummings had violated SCR 22.22(1)
by failing to notify the OLR of the Illinois
suspension. This court issued the requested
order to show cause, but Attorney Cummings
did not file a response. He also has not
filed an answer or other response to the
OLR's complaint. Accordingly, we proceed
with the resolution of this matter pursuant
to SCR 22.22(3).
¶4 Attorney Cummings was admitted to
the practice of law in Illinois in 1995. He
was also admitted to the practice of law in
this state in November 1997. According to
the Illinois disciplinary materials attached
to the OLR's complaint, Attorney Cummings
had been practicing law as an associate
attorney at a law firm in Highland Park,
Illinois, at the time of the underlying
events, but he was unemployed as of early
2017.
|
|
|
¶5 Prior to this proceeding, Attorney
Cummings has not been the subject of
professional discipline in this state. His
license to practice law in Wisconsin,
however, has been administratively suspended
since October 2000 for failure to pay
mandatory bar dues and supreme court
assessments.
¶6 According to the Illinois
disciplinary records, the Illinois license
suspension arose out of a mechanic's lien
matter that was assigned to Attorney
Cummings by the firm at which he worked.
Specifically, in May 2014 Attorney Cummings
was directed to have a mechanic's lien
prepared and recorded on behalf of a client
that was a subcontractor on a multi-unit
residential construction project in Campbell
County, Kentucky. Because Attorney Cummings
was not licensed to practice law in
Kentucky, he contacted a Kentucky lawyer to
handle the matter. Attorney Cummings was
supposed to provide that lawyer with the
information necessary for the lawyer to
prepare and record the mechanic's lien. In
order for the subcontractor's lien to be
valid under Kentucky law, the subcontractor
was required to provide to the property
owner notice of its intent to record the
mechanic's lien against the property on or
before August 12, 2014. As of that date,
however, Attorney Cummings had not provided
the necessary information to the Kentucky
lawyer so no such notice was given.
¶7 At some point between August 12 and
21, 2014, Attorney Cummings fabricated a
document that purported to be a mechanic's
lien that had been recorded in Campbell
County, Kentucky, on behalf of the
subcontractor. Attorney Cummings delivered
the fraudulent lien to the client and
falsely represented that it had been
properly recorded.
¶8 The client soon discovered that
Attorney Cummings' mechanic's lien was
fraudulent and that no mechanic's lien had
been recorded on its behalf. The client
sued both Attorney Cummings and his law firm
in December 2015. In February 2016 the law
firm terminated Attorney Cummings'
employment. In May 2016 Attorney Cummings
paid a settlement to the now former client.
|
|
|
¶9 The Illinois Attorney Registration
and Disciplinary Commission (ARDC) filed a
disciplinary petition regarding the
mechanic's lien matter, alleging that
Attorney Cummings had failed to act with
reasonable diligence, in violation of Rule
1.3 of the Illinois Rules of Professional
Conduct (IRPC); had failed to keep his
client reasonably informed about the status
of the lien matter, in violation of IRPC
1.4(a)(3); and had engaged in conduct
involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or
misrepresentation, in violation of IRPC
8.4(c). Based on a number of Illinois
disciplinary precedents and consideration of
both aggravating and mitigating factors,
including Attorney Cummings' remorse for his
misconduct, the ARDC requested a six-month
suspension. Attorney Cummings admitted the
assertions in the ARDC's petition and
consented to the imposition of a six-month
suspension. The Supreme Court of Illinois
ultimately imposed the requested six-month
suspension.
¶10 Supreme Court Rule 22.22(3) provides
that this court "shall impose the identical
discipline or license suspension" unless one
or more of the three listed exceptions
apply. Attorney Cummings has not filed any
response to the OLR's complaint or to this
court's order, alleging that any exception
applies. Our own review of the matter leads
us to conclude that none apply.
Accordingly, we conclude that the imposition
of a six-month suspension of Attorney
Cummings' license to practice law in
Wisconsin, as reciprocal discipline, is
warranted.
¶11 IT IS ORDERED that the license of
Michael Leslie Cummings to practice law in
Wisconsin is suspended for a period of six
months, effective the date of this order.
¶12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Michael
Leslie Cummings 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
is required for reinstatement from the
suspension imposed herein.
|
|
|