|
The Court entered the following order on
this date:
|
|
Upon consideration of the petition filed
pursuant to SCR 22.19 by Attorney James W.
Snyder requesting the consensual revocation
of his license to practice law in this
state, and upon consideration of the summary
of misconduct allegations against petitioner
being investigated by the Office of Lawyer
Regulation, and that Office's recommendation
in support of the request for consensual
license revocation (documents attached and
incorporated by reference),
|
|
IT IS ORDERED that the license of James W.
Snyder to practice law in this state is
revoked as of the date of this order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that James W. Snyder
comply with the provisions of SCR 22.26
concerning the duties of a person whose
license to practice law has been revoked.
BRADLEY and PROSSER, J.J., did not
participate.
Cornelia C. Clark
Clerk of Supreme Court
|
|
STATE OF WISCONSIN IN SUPREME COURT
In
the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against:
JAMES W. SNYDER,
Attorney at
Law,
Petitioner.
CASE CODE: 30912
CASE NO.: 01-0387-D
|
|
OFFICE OF LAWYER REGULATION'S
RECOMMENDATION ON PETITION FOR CONSENSUAL
LICENSE REVOCATION
TO: THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF THE WISCONSIN
SUPREME COURT
The Office of Lawyer Regulation ("OLR")
respectfully recommends that the Court grant
the Petition of James W. Snyder
("Petitioner"), and revoke Petitioner's
license to practice law in Wisconsin.
Petitioner's Petition for Consensual
License Revocation and the Director's
Summary of Misconduct Allegations Being
Investigated are attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference.
Petitioner was admitted to practice law in
Wisconsin on May 18, 1981 (Wisconsin State
Bar No. 1014652) and practiced in the
Appleton area. Petitioner's license to
practice law in Wisconsin has been suspended
since October 12, 2000.
Petitioner acknowledges that he cannot
successfully defend himself against serious
professional misconduct allegations that are
summarized in an attachment to his Petition.
Petitioner has had the benefit of legal
representation in this matter.
Petitioner admits his inability to defend
against misconduct allegations in an estate
matter. The misconduct under investigation
includes allegations that Petitioner made
more than one dishonest, deceitful filing to
the probate court, that he offered false
evidence to that court, that he lied to two
charitable beneficiaries in the matter about
funds to which they were entitled and that
he accepted payments for his firm that
amounted to more than a tenfold increase
over the amount he had claimed in a filing
to the court that his firm had received.
Petitioner filed a compliance affidavit
pursuant to SCR 22.26 in which he indicated
that he discontinued the practice of law,
effective September 5, 2000, and that he
represents no clients in pending matters.
Petitioner's former firm has made full
restitution to the two beneficiaries (the
American Lung Association and the American
Cancer Society).* The OLR is not requesting
a restitution order in connection with the
proposed revocation of Petitioner's law
license.
Under the circumstances, a formal order of
the Wisconsin Supreme Court revoking
Petitioner's license to practice law in
Wisconsin is warranted. The OLR respectfully
files this Recommendation in support of
Mr. Snyder's Petition for Consensual License
Revocation, and recommends to the Court
that it grant the petition and order the
immediate revocation of Petitioner's license
to practice law in Wisconsin.
The OLR does not seek an assessment of costs
in this matter.
Dated this 6th day of February, 2001.
OFFICE OF LAWYER REGULATION
By: /s/
WILLIAM J. WEIGEL
Litigation Counsel
State Bar No. 1010549
ADDRESS:
110 East Main Street, Room 315
Madison, WI 53703
Telephone: (608) 267-7274
Fax: (608) 267-1959
STATE OF WISCONSIN IN SUPREME COURT
IN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
AGAINST JAMES W. SNYDER, ATTORNEY AT LAW
CASE CODE 30912
OFFICE OF LAWYER REGULATION, CASE NO. 01-
0387-D
Complainant,
JAMES W. SNYDER,
Respondent.
PETITION FOR CONSENSUAL LICENSE
REVOCATION
TO: THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF THE WISCONSIN
SUPREME COURT
Pursuant to SCR 22.19, I, Attorney James W.
Snyder, hereby petition the Court as follows:
1. I became licensed to practice law in
the State of Wisconsin on May 18, 1981
(State Bar No. 1014652). On October 12,
2000, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ordered my
law license temporarily suspended, effective
October 12, 2000 (Exhibit 1 to Appendix A,
attached). My current address is 2942 West
Hiawatha Drive, Appleton, Wisconsin 54914-
6708.
2. I am the subject of an Office of
Lawyer Regulation ("OLR") misconduct
investigation.
3. A summary of the misconduct
allegations is attached hereto
as Director's Summary of Misconduct
Allegations Being Investigated (Appendix
A).
4. I acknowledge that I cannot
successfully defend myself against the
professional misconduct allegations in
Appendix A.
5. I am filing this Petition freely,
voluntarily and with the benefit of the
advice of counsel.
ACCORDINGLY, I hereby petition this Court
for consensual license revocation, pursuant
to SCR 22.19. Respectfully submitted, this
17th day of January, 2001.
/s/ JAMES W. SNYDER, Petitioner
P.O. Address:
James W. Snyder
c/o Atty. Joseph J. Beisenstein
Menn, Teetaert & Beisenstein, Ltd.
222 North Oneida Street
P.O. Box 785
Appleton, WI 54912-0785
(920) 731-6631
STATE OF WISCONSIN IN SUPREME COURT
IN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
AGAINST JAMES W. SNYDER, ATTORNEY AT LAW
CASE CODE 30912
OFFICE OF LAWYER REGULATION, CASE NO. 01-
0387-D
Complainant,
JAMES W. SNYDER,
Respondent.
DIRECTOR'S SUMMARY OF MISCONDUCT
ALLEGATIONS BEING INVESTIGATED
BACKGROUND
On October 12, 2000, the Wisconsin Supreme
Court ordered the law license of James W.
Snyder ("Petitioner") temporarily suspended,
effective October 12, 2000 (Exhibit 1). That
temporary suspension, sought by the Board of
Attorneys Professional Responsibility
("BAPR"), predecessor-in-interest to the
Office of Lawyer Regulation ("OLR"), was not
opposed by Petitioner.
Petitioner has indicated his intent to file
a Petition for Consensual License Revocation
acknowledging his inability to successfully
defend against the misconduct allegations
being investigated by the OLR.
SUMMARY OF FACTS AND MISCONDUCT
ALLEGATIONS
1. OLR staff investigator, Melody Rader-
Johnson began conducting an investigation of
Petitioner following the filing of a
grievance against him by successor counsel
in an Outagamie County estate matter.
Petitioner had been the original attorney
for the estate, but was removed by the Court
after failing to appear at the last of a
string of status hearings ordered by the
court. The grievance investigation
originally concerned Petitioner's possible
neglect of this and other Outagamie County
estates. Moreover, successor counsel in the
estate informed BAPR that the file for the
estate contained a check payable to a
beneficiary of the estate which had been
written more than a year earlier, but had
not yet been sent, even though Petitioner
had informed the court that the check had
been forwarded to that beneficiary.
2. In December 1998, Petitioner filed
with the Register in Probate an Amended
Final Account for the Estate of Pearl Domke
(Outagamie County Probate Case No. 95-IN-
239) which indicated that distributions had
been paid out from the Domke Estate as
follows: $235,012.21 to the personal
representative, $39,168.71 to the American
Cancer Society and $39,168.71 to the
American Lung Association. The Amended Final
Account also indicated that Petitioner's
firm had received $7,000 in attorneys fees.
3. On December 14, 1998, Petitioner filed
with the Register in Probate, Receipts and
Releases purportedly signed by
representatives from the American Lung
Association and the American Cancer Society
indicating that each charity had received a
distribution of $39,168.71 from the Domke
Estate. After receiving the executed
Receipts and Releases, the Probate Court
closed their file for the Domke Estate. In
fact, however, as of December 14, 1998,
neither the Lung Association nor the Cancer
Society had received any distribution from
the Domke Estate.
4. During 1999, after Petitioner received
several requests from the charities as to
when they might expect to receive their
distributions from the Domke Estate,
Petitioner forwarded trust account checks to
the charities in the amount of $13,968.71
each. Petitioner informed the charities that
these checks were for partial distributions
from the estate and that the charities could
expect to receive their final distribution
after the remainder of the bequest was
liquidated. The charities, however, received
no further distribution from the estate.
5. In May 2000, Investigator Rader-
Johnson received information from the
American Lung Association that they had not
received their final distribution from the
Pearl Domke Estate. The Lung Association
also indicated that they had recently
learned that the Outagamie County probate
file contained a Receipt and Release
purportedly executed by an employee of the
Lung Association acknowledging receipt of
the final distribution. The Lung Association
asserted that the signature on the Receipt
was probably forged since the Receipt
contained a signature of an employee who
left their employment in August 1998.
6. On or about August 3, 2000,
Investigator Rader-Johnson received
information from the American Cancer Society
alleging that they had not received their
final distribution from the Pearl Domke
Estate and that the Receipt and Release on
file with the probate court acknowledging
receipt of the final distribution contained
a forged signature.
7. Upon receiving this information from
the Lung Association and the Cancer Society,
Investigator Rader-Johnson reviewed
Outagamie County probate files, met with and
obtained sworn testimony from the Petitioner
and reviewed bank records and other
materials.
8. Based on the figures contained in the
Amended Final Account from the Domke Estate,
the Lung Association and the Cancer Society
should have received a total of
approximately $78,300. As of the spring of
2000, the charities had received only
approximately $27,500, rendering the Amended
Final Account filed by Petitioner to be
grossly inaccurate by leaving approximately
$50,700 unaccounted for.
9. Additionally, bank records from the
Domke Estate show that between April 27,
1996 and November 24, 1998, there were 14
checks made payable to Petitioner's firm
totaling $72,000 purportedly written by the
estate's personal representative. Petitioner
reported on the Amended Final Account that
his firm had only received $7,000 in legal
fees. The Amended Final Account does not
disclose the additional $65,000 in
disbursements from the estate to
Petitioner's firm.
10. The investigation of Petitioner's
conduct has to date revealed that Petitioner
engaged in the following misconduct:
|
|
a) In filing the Amended Final Account for
the Pearl Domke Estate in December, 1998,
which indicated that final disbursements had
been made from the Estate to all of the
beneficiaries, including the American Lung
Association and the American Cancer Society,
when Petitioner knew that final
disbursements had not been made from the
Domke Estate to those charities, Petitioner
engaged in conduct involving dishonesty,
fraud, deceit or misrepresentation, contrary
to SCR 20:8.4(c).
|
|
b) In preparing and filing the Receipts and
Releases dated December 14, 1998 which
contained forged signatures of
representatives from the American Lung
Association and the American Cancer Society
indicating that each charity had received
their final distribution of approximately
$39,000 from the Pearl Domke Estate, when
Petitioner knew that neither charity had
received any distribution from the Domke
Estate as of that date, Petitioner knowingly
offered evidence that he knew to be false,
contrary to SCR 20:3.3(a)(4), and engaged in
conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit
or misrepresentation, contrary to SCR 20:8.4
(c).
|
|
c) In stating to the American Lung
Association and the American Cancer Society
in October 1999, that the remainder of the
bequests to the charities would be
forthcoming, when Petitioner knew the Domke
Estate had been closed since December 1998,
Petitioner engaged in conduct involving
dishonesty, fraud, deceit or
misrepresentation, contrary to SCR 20:8.4(c).
|
|
d) In accepting payments of $72,000 to his
firm from the Domke Estate, but filing an
Amended Final Account showing that the firm
had received only $7,000 from the Domke
Estate, Petitioner engaged in dishonesty,
fraud, deceit or misrepresentation, contrary
to SCR 20:8.4(c).
|
|
Dated this 9th day of January, 2001.
OFFICE OF LAWYER REGULATION
By: /s/
KEITH L. SELLEN
Director
State Bar No. 1001088
ADDRESS:
110 East Main Street, Room 315
Madison, WI 53703
Telephone: (608) 267-7274
Fax: (608) 267-1959
|
|
Office of the Clerk
SUPREME COURT
110 E.
MAIN STREET, SUITE 215
P.O. BOX 1688
MADISON, WISCONSIN 53701-1688
TELEPHONE
(608) 266-1880
FACSIMILE (608) 267-0640
Web Site: www.courts.state.wi.us
October 12, 2000
To:
Office of Lawyer Regulation
110 E. Main St., #315
Madison, WI 53703
James W. Snyder
Krause, Metz & Snyder
15 Park Place
Appleton, WI 54915
Joseph J. Beisenstein
Menn Nelson Law Firm
P.O. Box 785
Appleton, WI 54912-0785
William J. Weigel
Office of Lawyer Regulation
110 E. Main Street, Rm. 315
Madison, WI 53703
You are hereby notified that the Court has
entered the following order:
No. XX-014062-D Matter of Disciplinary
Proceedings Against James W. Snyder:
BAPR v. Snyder
|
|
On September 27, 2000, the Board of
Attorneys Professional Responsibility filed
a notice of motion and motion and supporting
affidavit seeking the temporary suspension
of the license of James W. Snyder to
practice law in Wisconsin, pursuant to SCR
22.30(1); this court ordered a response on
October 4, 2000 and he indicated he has no
objection to the motion;
IT IS ORDERED that the motion is granted.
The license of Attorney Snyder to practice
law is temporarily suspended as of the date
of this order and until further notice of
this court. He shall further comply with the
requirements of SCR 22.26 relating to
license suspension if he has not already
done so.
Cornelia G. Clark
Clerk of Supreme Court
1 The Court's October 12, 2000 temporary
suspension order is provided as Exhibit 1 to
Appendix A, as attached to Mr. Snyder's
Petition.
2 The misconduct is more specifically
described in the Director's Summary of
Misconduct Allegations Being Investigated,
at paragraph 10(a)-(d).
|