|
Attorney Jack C. Hoag, 48, of Janesville,
represented a man on an appeal of the man’s
April 17, 1996 commitment, under ch. 980,
Stats., as a sexually violent person. The
notice of appeal was filed on August 13,
1996, subsequent to the applicable civil
appeal deadline. The Court of Appeals
raised the timeliness issue in an order
dated February 11, 1997, and directed the
appellant to file a memorandum on that issue
within seven days of the order. Hoag filed
such a memorandum, dated February 18, 1997.
In an opinion and order filed June 12, 1997,
the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal as
having been untimely filed. Hoag then
withdrew as the man’s attorney. Hoag failed
to inform his client that the Court of
Appeals had raised the timeliness issue;
that the matter was briefed; that the Court
of Appeals had acted to dismiss the appeal;
and that Hoag would then be withdrawing as
counsel in the matter. The client learned
of the dismissal from a fellow inmate who
came across the client’s case while doing
legal research.
|
|
The Board concluded that by failing to
inform his client of central developments in
his case, Hoag violated SCR 20:1.4(a), which
states, “A lawyer shall keep a client
reasonably informed about the status of a
matter and promptly comply with reasonable
requests for information.”
|
|
Hoag was privately reprimanded by the Board
in 1995, with his consent, for violations of
SCR 20:1.7(b) and 20:4.2. Hoag received a
second Board private reprimand, imposed with
his consent in 1997, for violations of SCR
20:1.4(b), 20:1.7(b), and 20:3.3(a)(1).
In accordance with SCR 21.09(2), the
Board of Attorneys Professional
Responsibility does hereby publicly
reprimand Attorney Jack C. Hoag of
Janesville, Wisconsin.
|