2011 WI 9
|
Supreme Court of Wisconsin |
|
|
|
|
Case No.: |
1997AP3058-D 1999AP2223-D |
|
Complete Title: |
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Charles Glynn, Attorney at Law. Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility, n/k/a Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant-Respondent-Cross- Appellant, v. Charles Glynn, Respondent-Appellant-Cross- Respondent. __________________________________________________ In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Charles Glynn, Attorney at Law. Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility, n/k/a Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant, v. Charles Glynn, Respondent. |
|
|
|
|
|
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST GLYNN |
|
|
|
|
Opinion Filed: |
February 15, 2011 |
|
Submitted on Briefs: |
||
Oral Argument: |
||
|
|
|
Source of Appeal: |
|
|
|
Court: |
|
|
County: |
|
|
Judge: |
|
|
|
|
Justices: |
|
|
|
Concurred: |
|
|
Dissented: |
|
|
Not Participating: |
PROSSER, J., did not participate. |
|
|
|
Attorneys: |
|
2011
WI 9
notice
This opinion is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports.
Nos. 1997AP3058-D and 1999AP2223-D
ATTORNEY reinstatement proceeding. Reinstatement granted.
¶1 PER CURIAM. We review a referee's report
recommending that Attorney Charles Glynn's license to practice law in
¶2 After careful consideration, we adopt the referee's findings of
fact and conclusions of law and conclude that Attorney Glynn's license to
practice law should be reinstated. We
need not impose any conditions upon Attorney Glynn's reinstatement because
Attorney Glynn has satisfied the conditions recommended by the referee. We direct Attorney Glynn to pay the costs of
the reinstatement proceeding, which total $3,753.16 as of November 2, 2010.[2]
¶3 Attorney Glynn was admitted to practice law in
¶4 Attorney Glynn was also convicted of one count of Theft from a Business Setting, Greater than $1,000 but less than $2,500, a class E felony, related to his handling of two of the estates for which he served as guardian. He was placed on probation for three years. He was released from probation in 2003.
¶5 In 1998 Ohio Casualty, Attorney Glynn's bonding company, obtained a $78,000 judgment against Attorney Glynn for the claims it paid on the two estates for which Attorney Glynn served as guardian. Attorney Glynn had already made restitution to the conservatorship from his own funds.
¶6 In October 2000 Attorney Glynn's Wisconsin law license was
suspended again, this time for nine months[3]
retroactive to the date of his earlier suspension, June 14, 2000. In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against
Glynn, 2000 WI 117, 238
¶7 On July 29, 2008, Attorney Glynn filed a petition seeking
reinstatement of his license to practice law in
¶8 Supreme court rule 22.31(1)[4] 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 of 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)[5] provides additional requirements that an attorney seeking reinstatement must show. All of these additional requirements are effectively incorporated into SCR 22.31(1).
¶9 When we review a referee's report and recommendation, we will
adopt a 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
¶10 Here,
the referee concluded Attorney Glynn had met his burden of demonstrating that
his license to practice law in
¶11 After his suspension Attorney Glynn worked at Roundy's warehouse
and then sold title insurance. He then
worked at the Milwaukee Child Welfare Bureau and also worked part-time at
St. Charles Youth and Family Services (
¶12 There is no evidence in this record that Attorney Glynn has engaged
in any improper conduct since his suspension.
SCR 22.29(4)(e). The referee
found that Attorney Glynn demonstrates a proper understanding of and attitude toward
the standards that are imposed upon members of the bar. SCR 22.29(4)(f). The referee
was satisfied that Attorney Glynn will act in conformity with these
standards. Indeed, Attorney Glynn
appears to have taken responsibility for his prior misconduct, stating that he
is "embarrassed, ashamed, and deeply sorry" for his misconduct. Attorney Glynn was drinking during the time
he engaged in the misconduct leading to his suspension. In July 2000 Attorney Glynn acknowledged his
alcoholism and joined Alcoholics Anonymous (AA). He has remained sober since that time and
regularly attends AA meetings. He
celebrated ten years of sobriety on July 10, 2010. Two references
noted that Attorney Glynn's recovery is "exceptional." Attorney Glynn also filed several
positive character references from attorneys, employers, and personal
friends. The referee thus concluded that Attorney Glynn had satisfied the
requirements of SCR 22.29(4)(g). The referee found further that
Attorney Glynn complied with SCR 22.26 after his suspension. SCR 22.29(4)(h). If reinstated Attorney Glynn intends
to practice juvenile and criminal
law within a law firm or in an association with other lawyers. SCR 22.29(4)(j).
¶13 The OLR did not oppose Attorney Glynn's reinstatement but expressed concern about certain aspects of his petition. The OLR noted that at the time of the evidentiary hearing Attorney Glynn had not, in fact, complied fully with the terms of the order of suspension because he has not yet paid full restitution. SCR 22.29(4)(c). All of the individual clients from whom Attorney Glynn took money were reimbursed by the bonding company, Ohio Casualty, and Ohio Casualty obtained a judgment for the amount they paid, plus interest. Attorney Glynn had yet to pay full restitution to Ohio Casualty. The referee noted that Attorney Glynn has paid Ohio Casualty approximately $16,500 of the restitution and at the time of the reinstatement hearing he was in the process of negotiating a compromised settlement of the judgment. Attorney Glynn requested that he be granted 90 days to file a satisfaction of judgment in the Ohio Casualty matter and the OLR did not object to this request. While this reinstatement petition was pending Attorney Glynn filed the satisfaction of judgment, fulfilling his restitution obligation.
¶14 Attorney Glynn also did not attend any CLE courses during his
suspension. See SCR 22.29(4)(d). He requested that as a
condition of his receiving his license, he be allowed 90 days to fulfill CLE
obligations required of him by the Board of Bar Examiners (BBE). The referee recommended granting Attorney
Glynn's request regarding the CLE requirements.
By memorandum dated December 15, 2010, the BBE advised the court that
Attorney Glynn had fulfilled the CLE requirements necessary for his
reinstatement.
¶15 Attorney Glynn has refrained from all alcohol for ten years. He has held positions of significant trust
and has managed finances of
¶16 Accordingly, after careful
review of the record we agree that Attorney Glynn has established by clear,
satisfactory, and convincing evidence that he has satisfied the criteria
necessary for reinstatement. We
therefore adopt the referee's findings of fact and conclusions of law and we
accept the referee's recommendation to reinstate Attorney Glynn's license to
practice law in
¶17 IT IS
ORDERED that Charles Glynn's license to practice law in
¶18 IT IS
FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date of this order, Charles Glynn
shall pay to the Office of Lawyer Regulation the costs of this proceeding. If the costs are not paid within the time
specified, and absent a showing to this court of his inability to pay the costs
within that time, the license of Charles Glynn to practice law in
¶19 DAVID T. PROSSER, J., did not participate.
[1] SCR 22.17(2) states:
If no appeal is filed timely, the supreme court shall review the referee's report; adopt, reject or modify the referee's findings and conclusions or remand the matter to the referee for additional findings; and determine and impose appropriate discipline. The court, on its own motion, may order the parties to file briefs in the matter.
[2] By letter dated December 21, 2010, Attorney Glynn advised the court he was waiving any objection to the costs of this reinstatement proceeding.
[3] Attorney Glynn never petitioned for reinstatement after the first disciplinary proceeding so he has not practiced law since June 14, 1999.
[4] SCR 22.31 provides as follows: Reinstatement hearing.
(1) The petitioner has the burden of demonstrating, by clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence, all of the following:
(a) That he or
she has the moral character to practice law in
(b) That his or her resumption of the practice of law will not be detrimental to the administration of justice or subversive of the public interest.
(c) That his or her representations in the petition, including the representations required by SCR 22.29(4)(a) to [(4m)] and 22.29(5), are substantiated.
(d) That he or she has complied fully with the terms of the order of suspension or revocation and with the requirements of SCR 22.26.
(2) The reinstatement hearing shall be public.
(3) The referee shall appoint a person to act as court reporter to make a verbatim record of the proceeding as provided in SCR 71.01 to 71.03.
(4) The petitioner and the director or a person designated by the director shall appear at the hearing. The petitioner may be represented by counsel.
(5) The hearing shall be conducted pursuant to the rules of civil procedure. The rules of evidence shall not apply, and the referee may consider any relevant information presented. Interested persons may present information in support of or in opposition to reinstatement.
[5] SCR 22.29(4)(a)-(4m) states the petition for reinstatement shall show all of the following:
(a) The petitioner desires to have the petitioner's license reinstated.
(b) The petitioner has not practiced law during the period of suspension or revocation.
(c) The petitioner has complied fully with the terms of the order of suspension or revocation and will continue to comply with them until the petitioner's license is reinstated.
(d) The petitioner has maintained competence and learning in the law by attendance at identified educational activities.
(e) The petitioner's conduct since the suspension or revocation has been exemplary and above reproach.
(f) The petitioner has a proper understanding of and attitude toward the standards that are imposed upon members of the bar and will act in conformity with the standards.
(g) The petitioner can safely be 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 as an officer of the courts.
(h) The petitioner has fully complied with the requirements set forth in SCR 22.26.
(j) The petitioner's proposed use of the license if reinstated.
(k) A full description of all of the petitioner's business activities during the period of suspension or revocation.
(4m) The petitioner has made restitution to or settled all claims of persons injured or harmed by petitioner's misconduct, including reimbursement to the Wisconsin lawyers’ fund for client protection for all payments made from that fund, or, if not, the petitioner's explanation of the failure or inability to do so.