Skip to content
A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Hard Fall From The Pinnacle Ends In Reinstatement

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has reinstated an attorney who had consented to license revocation in 2011 while facing 59 client complaints.

The Office of Lawyer Regulation had raised a number of concerns before the referee

The referee said the eight concerns raised by the OLR represent a very small part of the whole story in this case, and while it is appropriate to reach back into a petitioner’s past, that must be done in a balanced way. The referee said during Attorney Mutschler’s 18 years of practice he rose to the pinnacle of his profession, lectured regularly, wrote a treatise for the State Bar and for the Wisconsin Impaired Driving Center at the University of Wisconsin, authored and published dozens of articles, and was called upon to testify before the Wisconsin Legislature on four occasions regarding amendments to the traffic code. The referee said the lifeblood of drunk driving defense is motion practice, and Attorney Mutschler had an outstanding reputation for thinking outside the box in crafting innovative motions.

The referee said, “when the petitioner fell, he fell hard.” The referee pointed to Attorney Mutschler’s testimony at the first reinstatement hearing about his addiction to pain medication, and he explained how he ultimately went about getting sober. The referee also noted that Attorney Mutschler testified at the second reinstatement hearing that the OLR summoned him to appear for a meeting at their offices in Madison to discuss the 59 grievances that had been filed against him, and almost immediately upon his arrival in Madison, Attorney Mutschler signed a petition acknowledging that he could not successfully defend against the allegations of misconduct and he agreed to the consensual revocation of his law license.

The court 

As the referee noted, this court’s denial of Attorney Mutschler’s first reinstatement petition focused on his failure to make any restitution payments or have a repayment plan in mind. Since his first reinstatement petition was denied, Attorney Mutschler has made valiant efforts to begin paying restitution, and although his meager income and other financial obligations, including child support, have not allowed him to make much of a dent in the amount owed, he has made a start, and it appears he has done the best he could under the circumstances. As the referee also noted, if Attorney Mutschler’s license is reinstated, his employer will automatically deduct $500 per month from his wages
to go toward restitution. With the possibility of salary increases over time, reinstatement of Attorney Mutschler’s license will give him the capacity to whittle down his restitution obligations in a way that would never be possible if he were precluded from resuming his profession as an attorney.

(Mike Frisch)