In May, 1994, Atty. Stephen J. Dunlap of Hudson, was hired to serve as attorney and personal representative of an estate that was in excess of $600,000. The estate progressed in a timely manner until August, 1995, when activity on the estate ceased for periods of time for as long as one year. Mr. Dunlap failed to timely file required tax returns, to respond to inquiries from estate beneficiaries and the department of revenue, and to provide adequate notices and copies of documents to interested persons.

Mr. Dunlap had limited probate experience, and he had no experience in handling an estate that was in excess of $600,000.00, which involved tax issues that were not present in smaller estates. Dunlap had no calendar system to track preparation of the tax returns necessary in a large estate, and he had no checklist or other means by which to verify whether all of the specific bequests in the testator's will had been made. Dunlap eventually turned the still-open estate over to successor counsel in April, 1998.

During a status hearing in March, 1997, Mr. Dunlap told the court that after the hearing, he would be meeting with an accountant and that hopefully, the matter would be resolved at that time. Dunlap also told the court that the accountant had advised him that the accountant was seeking a compromise with the department of revenue. During the Board's investigation, Dunlap admitted that he knew he had no appointment scheduled with the accountant.

During another hearing in May, 1997, Mr. Dunlap told the court that after he filed tax returns in August, 1995, he had been in touch with the accountant and that Dunlap had been told there was a problem with the tax returns. The accountant told the Board that he was not aware of any disputes with the department of revenue and that he had had no communications with Dunlap after August, 1995.

The Board concluded that by failing for almost three years to take the steps necessary to complete the estate, Mr. Dunlap violated SCR 20:1.3, which requires a lawyer to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client. The Board further found that Mr. Dunlap failed to employ the requisite legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation, as required by SCR 20:1.1. The Board also found that by telling the court during two different hearings in 1997 that he would be meeting with an accountant or that he had communicated with an accountant, when in fact, Respondent had scheduled no meeting with the accountant and not communicated with the accountant since 1995, Respondent violated SCR 20:3.3(a)(1), which prohibits a lawyer from making a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal and SCR 20:8.4(c), which in part, prohibits a lawyer from engaging in conduct involving deceit or misrepresentation.

In accordance with SCR 21.09(2), the Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility does hereby publicly reprimand Atty. Stephen J. Dunlap of Hudson, Wisconsin.