¶4 On November 25, 2015, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued a 60-day suspension of Attorney Kurzman's license based on two counts of misconduct alleging five rule violations for inappropriately questioning a witness during a deposition, failing to provide two different clients with their files within a reasonable period of time, failing to submit records to the court as directed, and providing confidential materials from multiple clients to another of his clients.

¶5 The Minnesota Supreme Court found these acts violated Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 4.4(a), Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(d), Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.16(d), Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.1, Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.3, and Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.6(a). Attorney Kurzman failed to notify OLR of the Minnesota discipline within 20 days of its effective date.

¶6 On February 11, 2016, the OLR filed a complaint alleging that, by virtue of the Minnesota discipline, Attorney Kurzman is subject to reciprocal discipline in Wisconsin pursuant to SCR 22.22. The complaint further alleged that by failing to notify OLR of his Minnesota discipline for professional misconduct within 20 days of the effective date of its imposition, Attorney Kurzman violated SCR 22.22(1). The OLR asked this court to issue an order directing Attorney Kurzman to inform the court of any claim by him predicated upon the grounds set forth in SCR 22.22(3) that imposition of discipline reciprocal to that imposed in Minnesota would be unwarranted.

¶7 On March 31, 2016, the parties filed a jointly executed stipulation whereby Attorney Kurzman agrees that by virtue of the Minnesota suspension, he is subject to reciprocal discipline in Wisconsin pursuant to SCR 22.22. He agrees that the factual allegations contained in the OLR's complaint are accurate and that he committed the professional misconduct charged in the complaint. The stipulation states that Attorney Kurzman does not claim any of the defenses set forth in SCR 22.22(3)(a)-(c). The stipulation states that Attorney Kurzman fully understands the nature of the misconduct allegations against him, his right to contest those allegations, and the ramifications that would follow from this court's imposition of the stipulated level of discipline. The stipulation indicates that Attorney Kurzman understands his right to counsel and verifies that he is entering into the stipulation knowingly and voluntarily and that his entry into the stipulation represents his decision not to contest this matter. He agrees that it would be appropriate for this court to suspend his license to practice law for a period of 60 days.

¶8 Having carefully considered this matter, we approve the stipulation, adopt the stipulated facts and legal conclusions of professional misconduct, and we suspend Attorney Kurzman's license to practice law for a period of 60 days. Because Attorney Kurzman entered into a comprehensive stipulation under SCR 22.12 and no referee was needed, we do not impose any costs in this matter.

¶9 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Marc G. Kurzman to practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period of 60 days, effective the date of this order.