Seal Of Disapproval

An attorney with three prior reprimands and a 60-day suspension had his license revoked by the Wisconsin Supreme Court

In 2014 the Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions revoked Attorney Strouse’s notary commission, which he had held since 1992. The revocation was based on the administrative suspension of Attorney Strouse’s law license due to his failure to comply with mandatory continuing legal education reporting requirements. Attorney Strouse has not held a notary commission since 2014.

Between approximately January 2017 and October 2020, Attorney Thomas R. Napierala’s firm, Napierala Law Offices, LLC, shared office space in Milwaukee, Wisconsin with Attorney Strouse’s firm. During the time they shared office space, Attorney Napierala, who held a valid notary commission, often notarized documents for Attorney Strouse which related to the representation of clients for both firms.

The notary stamp went missing when they ended the office sharing relationship

Attorney Strouse had possession of Attorney Napierala’s notary stamp no later than November 9, 2020. Between November 9 and December 6, 2020, Attorney Strouse used Attorney Napierala’s notary stamp to affix Attorney Napierala’s notary seal on two affidavits without Attorney Napierala’s authorization or knowledge. In addition, Attorney Strouse affixed or caused his nonlawyer staff to affix Attorney Napierala’s electronic signature as the notary on the two affidavits without Attorney Napierala’s authorization or knowledge.

On inquiry

On December 16, 2020, Attorney Napierala emailed Attorney Strouse asking him to send the notary stamp to him as soon as possible. On December 18, 2020, Attorney Strouse replied to the email saying, “I do not have your notary seal.”
Attorney Napierala responded by informing Attorney Strouse that Vaitys had told Attorney Napierala that Attorney Strouse had the notary stamp. Attorney Strouse responded, “Well then, you know who has it.”

Respondent continued to use the notary, causing problems for both of them

On November 18, 2021, Attorney Strouse entered into an amended stipulation with the United States Trustee to resolve the motion for sanctions. Attorney Strouse stipulated that, without Attorney Napierala’s authorization or knowledge, he had retained possession of Attorney Napierala’s notary stamp from October 31, 2020 through March 8, 2021 and had used the notary stamp and affixed Attorney Napierala’s signature on 18 affidavits filed with the Bankruptcy Court. Attorney Strouse further stipulated to making a false representation and false verbal and written representations to Judge Perhach. Attorney Strouse acknowledged that his conduct violated 11 U.S.C. § 526(a)(2).

There were other violations involving his association with a suspended lawyer.

Sanction

Attorney Strouse’s misconduct is disturbing. Knowing that his notary commission had been revoked, he appropriated Attorney Napierala’s notary seal and, for a period of several months, applied the notary seal and affixed Attorney Napierala’s electronic signature to multiple documents and filed the documents with the Bankruptcy Court. When confronted by Attorney Napierala, Attorney Strouse lied and said he did not have the notary seal. When confronted by the Bankruptcy Court, he lied again, concocted a bogus story, and claimed Attorney Napierala had in fact notarized the documents in question…

Any sanction short of revocation would unduly depreciate the gravity of Attorney Strouse’s misconduct. We also agree with the referee that, as is our usual custom, Attorney Strouse should be assessed the full costs of this proceeding.

(Mike Frisch)