|
|
|
|
|
Case No.: |
03-0255-D |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Complete Title: |
|
|
|
|
In the
Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against
David G. Davies, Attorney at Law: Office
of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant, v. David
G. Davies, Respondent. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST DAVIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Opinion Filed: |
March 13, 2003 |
|
|
Submitted on Briefs: |
||
|
Oral Argument: |
||
|
|
|
|
|
Source of Appeal: |
|
|
|
|
Court: |
|
|
|
County: |
|
|
|
Judge: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Justices: |
|
|
|
|
Concurred: |
|
|
|
Dissented: |
|
|
|
Not Participating: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attorneys: |
|
|
2003 WI 18
|
|
Supreme
Court of Wisconsin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notice This order is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports. |
|
The Court entered the following order on this date:
The Office of
Lawyer Regulation and Attorney David G. Davies have stipulated, pursuant to SCR
22.12, for reciprocal discipline under SCR 22.22. The Arizona Supreme Court suspended Attorney Davies’ Arizona law
license for 30 days, effective December 12, 2001.
Attorney Davies
was admitted to practice law in Wisconsin in 1953 and he became licensed to
practice law in Arizona. In 1994
Attorney Davies’ Wisconsin license was suspended for noncompliance with
continuing legal education (CLE) requirements.
His Wisconsin license remains suspended.
The 30-day
suspension in Arizona resulted from misconduct involving Attorney Davies’
preparation of an original will and subsequent amendments that named him as a
beneficiary of his client’s estate without having the client seek the advice of
independent counsel.
SCR 22.22(3)
provides that this court shall impose the identical discipline or license
suspension unless the procedure in the other jurisdiction was so lacking in
notice or opportunity to be heard as to constitute a due process violation;
there was such an infirmity of proof establishing the misconduct that this
court should not accept as final the misconduct finding; or the misconduct
justifies substantially different discipline here. Neither OLR nor Attorney Davies contend, nor does this court
find, that any of these three exceptions exist.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED
that the license of David G. Davies to practice law in the state of Wisconsin
be suspended for 30 days, effective the date of this order;
IT IS FURTHER
ORDERED that this suspension does not affect the existing suspensions for
failure to comply with CLE requirements which would also have to be satisfied
in order for Attorney Davies’ license to practice law in Wisconsin to be
reinstated;
IT IS FURTHER
ORDERED that Attorney Davies shall comply, if he has not already done so, with
the requirements of SCR 22.26 pertaining to activities following suspension.