Reprimand With CLE Requirements

An attorney who had mishandled a civil appeal was publicly reprimanded by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.The factual predicate:

On January 2, 2004, Attorney Mulligan filed a cross-appeal seeking reversal ofthe jury’s finding that a breach of contract had occurred. He argued that the evidence at trial was notsufficient to support the jury’s verdict. However, Attorney Mulligan never obtained the transcripts from the trialand never filed a transcript from the jury trial with the court ofappeals. Attorney Mulligan neverconsulted with or advised D.C. [the client] that he was proceeding with the appeal withouthaving obtained the trial transcripts. Indeed, Attorney Mulligan did not communicate with his client afterJanuary 17, 2004——thedate Attorney Mulligan received advance fees to pursue the appeal——until June 3, 2005——the date he notified D.C.of the court of appeals’ adverse decision.

In its decision, the court of appeals observed:

On cross-appeal, [D.C]challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury’s verdict. His argument, however, is whollyundeveloped and unsupported by any reference to the record or trial testimony. See Wis. Stat. (Rule) 809.19(1)(e) (2003-04). Because [D.C] proffers no argument susceptible to meaningful appellatereview, we affirm the judgment against him.

Emphasis added.

The attorney must also complete CLE-approved courses in legal writing and appellate practice. (MIke Frisch)