Reciprocal And Sensible

The Wisconsin Supreme Court imposed a reciprocal 30 day suspension on an attorney suspended for that period of time in Arizona. The court reviewed the facts facts found in the original disciplining jurisdiction:

The following facts are taken from documents relating to the Arizona disciplinaryproceedings, which were attached to the OLR’s complaint and acknowledged in theparties’ stipulation.  In 2002 Attorney…was the defendant in a malpractice action.  Shortly after the malpractice action wassettled in February 2004, Attorney…used an assumed name to send sixe-mails to the attorneys who had represented Attorney…’s former clientin the malpractice action against him. The e-mails contained profane and abusive language, and some of themcontained slurs.  In addition, some ofthe e-mails threatened physical harm to the opposing attorneys and mentionedtheir home addresses, causing distress to the attorneys and theirfamilies.  The police were contacted andsubsequently learned that Attorney…had been the sender of the e-mails.  Attorney…had apparently stoppedsending the e-mails of his own accord prior to being apprehended by the police.

Attorney…was charged with and pled guilty to one count ofmisdemeanor harassment.  The Arizona trial courtimposed a $2,500 fine and sentenced Attorney…to ten days ofunsupervised probation.  The probationaryperiod was subsequently waived because Attorney …immediately paid thefine.

The court found the record from Arizona reflected a thorough proceeding and deferred to the Arizona sanction determination. Arizona also had imposed a two-year probation. The court found that this aspect of the sanction is fulfilled by successful completion of the Arizona probation rather than through supervision in Wisconsin.

The trend of email-related misconduct continues. (Mike Frisch)