Disciplinary Proceedings Against Boyd
2006 WI 28, 289 Wis.2d 351, 711 N.W.2d 268 (2006)
|
ATTORNEY disciplinary
proceeding. Attorney publicly
reprimanded.
¶1 PER CURIAM. We review a referee's
report and recommendation issued November
9, 2005, concluding that Attorney Joan M.
Boyd violated the rules of professional
conduct in connection with her
representation of S.P. The referee
recommended this court impose a public
reprimand upon Attorney Boyd, together with
certain conditions upon her license to
practice law, and that it require Attorney
Boyd to pay restitution and costs in
connection with this matter. We adopt the
referee's findings of fact and conclusions
of law and the recommendations regarding
discipline.
|
|
|
¶2 Attorney Boyd was admitted to
practice law in Wisconsin in 1989. In 2000
she was publicly reprimanded for forging a
client's endorsement on a refund check from
a bankruptcy trustee and for depositing the
client funds into her law office business
account. Conditions were placed upon her
license to practice law in connection with
that matter, including the requirement that
she use an accounting firm to handle her
finances, that she attend certain
continuing legal education courses, and
that she continue to receive medical
treatment for bipolar/manic depressive
disorder.
|
|
|
¶3 On January 24, 2005, the Office of
Lawyer Regulation (OLR) filed a complaint
against Attorney Boyd alleging professional
misconduct involving her representation of
her former client, S.P. Attorney Boyd
filed an answer and Timothy L. Vocke was
appointed as referee in the matter.
Subsequently, Attorney Boyd withdrew her
answer and pled no contest to the
allegations contained in the OLR complaint.-
-
¶4 The complaint alleged, and the
referee found, that Attorney Boyd
represented S.P. in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy
matter. Attorney Boyd received a total of
$700 from S.P. for purposes of commencing
the bankruptcy action. However, Attorney
Boyd failed to deposit her client's
payments into her client trust account.
When asked by successor counsel to refund a
portion of the retainer, Attorney Boyd
commingled her own funds in the client
trust account, then made the $300 refund
check payable to the wrong payee.
|
|
|
¶5 The OLR alleged, and the referee
concluded, that by failing to deposit the
client's payments into her client trust
account, Attorney Boyd failed to hold in
trust, property of a client or third person
that is in the lawyer's possession in
connection with a representation, in
violation of former SCR 20:1.15(a). In
addition, by depositing $300 of her own
funds into her client trust account and
issuing a check for $300 to successor
counsel to refund a portion of the fee,
Attorney Boyd commingled her own funds into
her client trust account in violation of
former SCR 20:1.15(a).
¶6 Attorney Boyd was also retained by
S.P. to pursue the possibility of
initiating a federal civil rights action on
her behalf against a variety of
individuals, including state and other
government officials involved in a child in
need of protective services (CHIPS) case
involving S.P.'s child. Attorney Boyd
informed S.P. that she thought S.P. had "a
good case" and that she thought S.P. might
obtain a "substantial settlement." She
requested a $10,000 deposit, plus $2000 for
costs, and over time S.P. made payments
totaling $6500 to pursue the civil rights
matter. No such action was ever commenced.
|
|
|
¶7 The OLR alleged, and the referee
subsequently concluded, that Attorney Boyd
failed to provide the legal skill or
preparation reasonably necessary to handle
the federal civil rights claim, in
violation of SCR 20:1.1.
|
|
|
¶8 In addition, the OLR alleged, and
the referee concluded, that the fee
Attorney Boyd charged S.P. in connection
with the civil rights matter was
unreasonable, in violation of SCR 20:1.5
(a). The referee particularly noted that
the legal bills reflected a "great deal of
time for 'legal research'" although no
action was ever filed. The referee also
noted that he was persuaded by the OLR
investigator's testimony, opining that
Attorney Boyd should have done more
research before offering her opinion on the
viability of a civil rights claim and
that "the minimal amount of research"
should have demonstrated that S.P. did not
have a viable civil rights claim.
|
|
|
¶9 In evaluating the appropriate
discipline, the referee acknowledged that
the aggrieved client was "highly
emotional." However, he also found that,
although cooperative with the OLR, Attorney
Boyd showed no sign of remorse, took a
significant amount of money from a person
with limited resources, failed to make
restitution to that person, and committed
multiple disciplinary violations, albeit
against this single client.
|
|
|
¶10 At a hearing conducted on July 27,
2005, Attorney Boyd withdrew her answer and
entered a no-contest plea to the
allegations contained in the OLR
complaint. However, Attorney Boyd's
subsequent brief on the question of
sanctions contained certain facts that the
OLR asserted were not facts of record. The
referee agreed, whereupon Attorney Boyd
sought to withdraw her no-contest plea.
Following further hearing and argument the
referee denied that motion, observing that,
in any event, Attorney Boyd's answer had
established a sufficient factual basis for
the counts alleged against her.
¶11 The referee then considered the
request from the OLR for a 60-day license
suspension. Ultimately, after discussing
various legal authorities, the referee
recommended that the court: (1) impose a
public reprimand; (2) order restitution in
the amount of $5450 plus interest of 12
percent; (3) ensure that Attorney Boyd
reach an agreement with the OLR that
another accounting firm handle her
finances; (4) make certain that Attorney
Boyd supply the OLR with a medical
authorization for purposes of her mental
condition and continued treatment for her
mental health condition; (5) guarantee that
Attorney Boyd attend and pass the OLR trust
account school; and (6) order Attorney Boyd
to pay the costs of the prosecution of this
case.
¶12 We somewhat reluctantly agree that
a public reprimand is sufficient discipline
for Attorney Boyd's misconduct in this
matter. However, mindful of the fact that
no appeal was filed in this matter, we
accept the referee's recommendations. We
further agree that the conditions
recommended by the referee are appropriate
and we order Attorney Boyd to pay the costs
of this disciplinary proceeding, which are
$7006.39 as of November 29, 2005.
¶13 IT IS ORDERED that Joan M. Boyd is
publicly reprimanded for professional
misconduct.
¶14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within
30 days of the date of this order, Attorney
Joan M. Boyd shall pay restitution to the
client, S.P., in the amount of $5450 plus
interest at the rate of 12 percent per
annum from the date of August 23, 2002
until the date the client is repaid in full.
|
|
|
¶15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the
following conditions are imposed upon
Attorney Boyd's license to practice law in
Wisconsin:
Attorney Boyd shall attend and satisfy
trust account training requirements as
directed by the OLR;
Six months after the date of this order,
and every six months thereafter until two
years after the date of this order,
Attorney Boyd shall provide full medical
treatment records to the OLR and any
authorizations necessary to enable the OLR
to monitor her medical condition.
Within three months after the date of
this order, Attorney Boyd shall enter into
an agreement with the OLR regarding an
acceptable accounting firm to manage her
finances.
¶16 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within
60 days of the date of this order Attorney
Joan M. Boyd 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 an inability to
pay the costs within that time, the license
of Attorney Joan M. Boyd to practice law in
Wisconsin shall be suspended until further
order of the court.
|
|
|