In April 1993, Atty. Steven J. Luchsinger of Watertown agreed to seek a modification of a divorce settlement that the client had entered into pro se, and that had been accepted by the court at a final hearing. Time was of the essence, as the client wanted to obtain the modification before the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Divorce Judgment were issued. The client paid Luchsinger a $750 retainer. Luchsinger failed to take any steps for the next two months to seek the modification, during which time the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgment were issued by the court. Luchsinger then notified the client that he was declining to represent her and suggested she obtain a new attorney. Luchsinger returned only a part of the client's retainer, however, charging her $225 in legal fees and $38.70 in costs, even though the client had obtained no benefit from the services that Luchsinger had allegedly performed. The Board found that Luchsinger failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness, contrary to SCR 20:1.3, when he failed to act for two months after he had agreed to act expeditiously and when he knew that time was of the essence, and that upon termination of representation, Luchsinger failed to refund an advance payment of fee that had not been earned, contrary to SCR 20:1.16(d).

In a separate matter, Atty. Luchsinger was appointed by the State Public Defender's office to represent a client on OWI charges. Atty. Luchsinger subsequently entered into a plea agreement with the District Attorney's office without ever meeting or consulting with the client. Luchsinger and the District Attorney's office then submitted a motion to the court securing a continuance of the client's scheduled jury trial on the ground that the parties had entered into an agreement to resolve the case. The next day the client nevertheless appeared for his jury trial and told the court that he had not been consulted about the agreement and that he wanted a jury trial. The plea was withdrawn, but Luchsinger did continue to represent the client, and the client eventually entered a plea. The Board found that Luchsinger violated SCR 20:1.2(a) by accepting a plea agreement without consulting with his client, violated 20:1.4(a) by failing to inform his client about the plea offer, and violated SCR 20:3.3(a) by submitting a motion to the court that falsely stated that his client had entered into an agreement to resolve the case.

In determining that Luchsinger should be publicly reprimanded, the Board noted that Luchsinger had earlier received both a private and public reprimand for other misconduct. As a condition of issuing this public reprimand, the Board has required Atty. Luchsinger to also refund $225 in legal fees to the first client and, by signing this reprimand, Atty. Luchsinger agrees that he has done so.

In accordance with SCR 21.09(2), the Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility does hereby publicly reprimand Attorney Steven J. Luchsinger, of Watertown.