|
ATTORNEY reinstatement proceeding.
Attorney's license reinstated with
conditions.
¶1 PER CURIAM. We review a report
filed by Referee Jonathan V. Goodman,
recommending that the court reinstate the
license of Jane A. Edgar to practice law in
Wisconsin with conditions. Upon careful
review of the matter, we agree that Attorney
Edgar's license should be reinstated, with
conditions. We further agree that Attorney
Edgar should be required to pay the full
costs of this proceeding, which are
$2,575.60 as of April 4, 2016.
¶2 Attorney Edgar was admitted to
practice law in Wisconsin on June 17, 1985.
On March 22, 1999, the Court suspended her
license to practice law for two years for
misconduct consisting of conversion of
funds, improperly commingling funds, and
falsely certifying that she had a trust
account and maintained proper trust account
and bank records. Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Edgar, 230 Wis. 2d 205, 601 N.W.2d
284 (1999).
¶3 In 2003, Edgar's license was
suspended for an additional year,
retroactive to March 22, 2001, for
misconduct consisting of multiple violations
of failing to take reasonably practicable
steps to protect her clients' interests;
failing to keep clients reasonably informed
or to comply with clients' requests for
information; failing to act with reasonable
diligence; and failing to cooperate with
OLR's grievance investigations. She also
failed to render a full accounting in
connection with an advanced fee; practiced
law while under administrative suspension;
and failed to obtain a written conflict
waiver. Disciplinary Proceedings Against
Edgar, 2003 WI 49, 261 Wis. 2d 413, 661
N.W.2d 817.
¶4 On September 20, 2010, Attorney
Edgar unsuccessfully sought reinstatement of
her Wisconsin law license. Disciplinary
Proceedings Against Edgar, 2012 WI 19, 338
Wis. 2d 729, 809 N.W.2d 524.
¶5 On June 22, 2015, Attorney Edgar
filed a new petition seeking reinstatement
of her law license. On December 29, 2015,
the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) filed
a response stating it does not oppose her
reinstatement but recommending a lawyer
oversee her practice for a period of two
years. The referee conducted a public
hearing on February 10, 2016. The referee
filed his report and recommendation on March
15, 2016, recommending reinstatement, with
one year of monitoring by an attorney.
|
|
¶6 Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 22.31(1)
provides the standards to be met for
reinstatement. Specifically, the petitioner
must show by clear, satisfactory, and
convincing evidence that he or she has the
moral character to practice law, that his or
her resumption of the practice of law will
not be detrimental to the administration of
justice or subversive to the public
interest, and that he or she has complied
with SCR 22.26 and the terms of the order of
suspension. In addition to these
requirements, SCR 22.29(4)(a)-(4m) provides
additional requirements that a petition for
reinstatement must show. All of these
additional requirements are effectively
incorporated into SCR 22.31(1).
|
|
¶7 When we review a referee's report
and recommendation, we will adopt the
referee's findings of fact unless they are
clearly erroneous. Conclusions of law are
reviewed de novo. See In re Disciplinary
Proceedings Against Eisenberg, 2004 WI 14,
¶5, 269 Wis. 2d 43, 675 N.W.2d 747.
¶8 We conclude that the referee's
findings support a determination that
Attorney Edgar has met her burden to
establish by clear, satisfactory, and
convincing evidence that she has met all of
the standards required for reinstatement of
her license to practice law in Wisconsin.
The referee found that Attorney Edgar has
not practiced law during the period of her
suspension; that she has complied fully with
the terms of the order of suspension and
will continue to do so until her license is
reinstated; and that she has maintained
competence and learning in the law. If
reinstated, Attorney Edgar intends to serve
as a guardian ad litem in Children's Court.
¶9 The record further supports the
referee's conclusion that Attorney Edgar's
conduct since her suspension has been
exemplary and above reproach; that she has a
proper understanding of and attitude toward
the standards that are imposed upon members
of the bar and will act in conformity with
those standards; that she can be safely
recommended to the legal profession, the
courts, and the public as a person fit to be
consulted by others and to represent them
and otherwise act in matters of trust and
confidence and in general to aid in the
administration of justice as a member of the
bar and an officer of the courts; and that
she has fully complied with the requirements
set forth in SCR 22.26.
¶10 In assessing Attorney Edgar's moral
character and whether her resumption of the
practice of law would be detrimental to the
administration of justice or subversive of
the public interest, the referee was
impressed by the testimony of the Dean and
Rector of All Saints Cathedral, who
testified in support of Attorney Edgar's
character. The referee noted Attorney Edgar
was "very contrite" in acknowledging her
past professional misconduct and observed
that Attorney Edgar's suspension has
resulted in significant economic and social
hardship to her.
¶11 The OLR also acknowledges that
Attorney Edgar has expressed "deep regret"
for her misconduct. Attorney Edgar has
satisfied the costs imposed on her in
connection with her 1999 disciplinary case,
paid full restitution to former clients as
required by her 2003 suspension order, and
has paid the costs associated with her first
attempt at reinstatement. And,
significantly, Attorney Edgar has addressed
mental health issues that previously
compromised her ability to function as a
lawyer. Consequently, many of the
conditions imposed in prior disciplinary
proceedings are no longer warranted.
|
|
¶12 The OLR recommended that Attorney
Edgar be monitored by an attorney, approved
by the OLR, for a period of two years
following her reinstatement, to assist her
transition back into the practice of law.
The referee opined, without elaboration,
that a single year would be sufficient.
¶13 Upon careful review of the matter,
we agree that Attorney Edgar's license
should be reinstated, subject to monitoring
by an attorney. We agree with the OLR that a
period of two years is appropriate to better
ensure a smooth transition as Attorney Edger
resumes the practice of law.
¶14 It is this court's general practice
to assess the full costs of a proceeding
against a respondent. See SCR 22.24(1m). We
follow that general practice here.
¶15 IT IS ORDERED that the license of
Jane A. Edgar to practice law in Wisconsin
is reinstated, effective the date of this
order.
¶16 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that as a
condition of reinstatement of Jane A.
Edgar's license to practice law in
Wisconsin, she shall be monitored by an
attorney, approved by the Office of Lawyer
Regulation, for a period of two years
following reinstatement.
¶17 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60
days of the date of this order, Jane A.
Edgar shall pay to the Office of Lawyer
Regulation the costs of this proceeding,
which are $2,575.60 as of the date of this
order.
|