|
Thomas P. DeMuth (“DeMuth”) is a Wisconsin
attorney whose State Bar identification
number is 1000207. DeMuth practices law in
Milwaukee, Wisconsin. DeMuth was first
licensed to practice law in Wisconsin on
June 20, 1989.
In December of 2005, DeMuth
voluntarily placed his Wisconsin State Bar
Membership into inactive status. In
February of 2006, DeMuth was removed from
the active roles of the State Bar of
Illinois. On October 31, 2007, the State
Bar of Wisconsin suspended DeMuth for
failure to pay mandatory dues and
assessments. The State Bar of Wisconsin
reinstated DeMuth’s license to practice law
on December 15, 2009. However, DeMuth
remained on inactive status while he
completed Continuing Legal Education
requirements. On March 22, 2010, the State
Bar of Wisconsin reactivated DeMuth’s
Wisconsin law license. Currently, DeMuth
remains ineligible to practice law in the
State of Illinois.
On September 1, 2009, a Milwaukee
law firm hired DeMuth as a shareholder.
From September 1, 2009 through December 15,
2009, DeMuth practiced law, even though his
law license had been suspended and was not
reinstated until December 15, 2009. Upon
reinstatement, DeMuth continued to practice
law, although his license to practice
remained on inactive status until March 22,
2010.
During the time in which DeMuth’s
license to practice law was suspended and/or
inactive, DeMuth and his law firm
represented to the public on the firm’s
website that DeMuth was a shareholder in the
firm, that DeMuth was licensed to practice
law in Wisconsin, and that he represented
clients in corporate, real estate and heath
care matters. The firm’s website also
noted that DeMuth had been admitted to the
practice of law in Illinois, was a member of
the Illinois State Bar Association, and that
he was a member of the Milwaukee Bar
Association. These representations were
untrue, as DeMuth was not authorized to
practice law in either Wisconsin or Illinois
at the time, and he was not currently a
member of the Illinois State Bar Association
or the Milwaukee Bar Association.
|
|
By engaging in the practice of law or
otherwise acting in a manner purporting to
be authorized or qualified to practice law
during the period of September 1, 2009
through December 15, 2009, while his law
license was suspended for nonpayment of
dues, DeMuth violated SCR 10.03(6), which
states, “(6) Penalty for nonpayment of
dues. If the annual dues or assessments of
any member remain unpaid 120 days after the
payment is due, the membership of the member
may be suspended in the manner provided by
the bylaws; and no person whose membership
is so suspended for nonpayment of dues or
assessments may practice law during the
period of the suspension.”
|
|
By engaging in the practice of law or
otherwise engaging in law work activity
during the period of September 1, 2009
through December 15, 2009 while his law
license was suspended, DeMuth violated SCR
22.26(2), which states, “An attorney whose
license to practice law is suspended or
revoked or who is suspended from the
practice of law may not engage in this state
in the practice of law or in any law work
activity customarily done by law students,
law clerks, or other paralegal personnel,
except that the attorney may engage in law
related work in this state for a commercial
employer itself not engaged in the practice
of law.” Both SCR 10.03(6) and SCR 22.26
(2) are enforceable through SCR 20:8.4(f),
which provides, “It is professional
misconduct for a lawyer to: . . . (f)
violate a . . . supreme court rule . . .
regulating the conduct of lawyers. . . .”
|
|
By engaging in the practice of law during
the period of September 1, 2009 through
March 22, 2010 while his law license was
inactive, DeMuth violated SCR 10.03(3). SCR
10.03(3) provides, in relevant part, “(c) No
judicial or inactive member may practice law
in this state . . . No person engaged in the
practice of law in this state in his or her
own behalf or as an assistant or employee of
an active member of the state bar, or
occupying a position, the duties of which
require the giving of legal advice or
service in this state, may be enrolled as an
inactive member.”
|
|
By engaging in the practice of law or
otherwise acting in a manner purporting to
be authorized or qualified to practice law
during the period of September 1, 2009
through March 22, 2010 while his law license
was inactive, DeMuth violated former and
current SCR 10.03(4). Former SCR 10.03(4),
effective through December 31, 2009, stated,
in relevant part, “(a) Only active members
may practice law. No individual other than
an enrolled active member of the state bar
may practice law in this state or in any
manner purport to be authorized or qualified
to practice law. . . .” Current SCR 10.03
(4), effective January 1, 2010, provides, in
relevant part, “(a) No individual other than
an enrolled active member of the state bar
may practice law in this state or in any
manner purported [sic] to be authorized or
qualified to practice law. . . .” SCR 10.03
(3), and former and current SCR 10.03(4) are
enforceable through SCR 20:8.4(f), which
provides, “It is professional misconduct for
a lawyer to: . . . (f) violate a . . .
supreme court rule . . . regulating the
conduct of lawyers. . . .”
|
|
By representing to the public in the firm’s
website that DeMuth was a “shareholder” in
the firm, that he was licensed to practice
law in Wisconsin, and that he represented
clients in corporate, real estate and heath
care matters during the time in which his
law license was suspended and/or inactive,
and, furthermore, in representing that he
was licensed in Illinois, was a member of
the Illinois State Bar Association, and that
he was a member of the Milwaukee Bar
Association, when he was not eligible to
practice law in Illinois and was not a
member of the Illinois State Bar Association
and not a member of the Milwaukee Bar
Association, DeMuth made one or more false
or misleading communications regarding his
services, in violation of SCR 20:7.5(a) and
SCR 20:7.1(a). SCR 20:7.5(a) states, in
relevant part, “A lawyer shall not use a
firm name or letterhead or other
professional designation that violates SCR
20:7.1.” SCR 20:7.1(a) states, in relevant
part, “A lawyer shall not make a false or
misleading communication about the lawyer or
the lawyer’s services. A communication is
false or misleading if it: “(a) contains a
material misrepresentation of fact or law,
or omits a fact necessary to make the
statements considered as a whole not
materially misleading. . . .”
|
|
By authorizing, ratifying, or otherwise
permitting the law firm to publish on its
firm website information stating that DeMuth
represented clients in corporate, real
estate and heath care matters during the
time in which his law license in Wisconsin
was suspended and/or inactive, and,
furthermore, in representing that DeMuth was
licensed in Illinois, was a member of the
Illinois State Bar Association, and that he
was a member of the Milwaukee Bar
Association, when DeMuth was not eligible to
practice law in Illinois and was not a
member of the Illinois State Bar Association
or the Milwaukee Bar Association, DeMuth
engaged in conduct involving dishonesty,
deceit, or misrepresentation, in violation
of SCR 20:8.4(c).
As a prior condition of the issuance
of this public reprimand, DeMuth coordinated
the removal of any and all representations
on the law firm website that were untrue,
including his identification as a member of
the Illinois State Bar Association and the
information that he was “admitted” in
Illinois.
Respondent has no prior disciplinary
history.
In accordance with SCR 22.09(3), Attorney
DeMuth is hereby publicly reprimanded.
|