Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Amie Trupke , 381 Wis. 2d 136 ( 2018 )

2018 WI 43
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN
CASE NO.: 2017AP1465-D
COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Amie B. Trupke, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation,
Complainant,
v.
Amie B. Trupke,
Respondent.
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST TRUPKE
OPINION FILED: April 24, 2018
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS:
ORAL ARGUMENT:
SOURCE OF APPEAL:
COURT:
COUNTY:
JUDGE:
JUSTICES:
CONCURRED:
DISSENTED:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ATTORNEYS:
2018 WI 43
NOTICE
This opinion is subject to further
editing and modification. The final
version will appear in the bound
volume of the official reports.
No. 2017AP1465-D
STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Amie B. Trupke, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation, FILED
Complainant,
APR 24, 2018
v.
Sheila T. Reiff
Clerk of Supreme Court
Amie B. Trupke,
Respondent.
ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney's license
suspended.
¶1 PER CURIAM. We review a stipulation filed pursuant
to Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 22.12 between the Office of Lawyer
Regulation (OLR) and Attorney Amie B. Trupke. The stipulation
provides that Attorney Trupke committed two counts of
professional misconduct and requests that the court suspend
Attorney Trupke's license to practice law in this state for one
year.
No. 2017AP1465-D
¶2 After carefully reviewing this matter, we accept the
stipulation and impose the requested discipline. We do not
order any restitution, as none was requested by the OLR.
Because this matter has been resolved by a stipulation under
SCR 22.12 without the need for the appointment of a referee, we
impose no costs on Attorney Trupke.
¶3 Attorney Trupke was admitted to the practice of law in
Wisconsin in 2002. She resides in Oregon, Wisconsin. Attorney
Trupke has not previously been the subject of professional
discipline. At the times of the events giving rise to this
proceeding, Attorney Trupke was a partner in a Madison law firm.
¶4 On July 28, 2017, the OLR filed a disciplinary
complaint against Attorney Trupke alleging two counts of
professional misconduct and seeking a one-year suspension.
Attorney Trupke retained counsel and responded to the complaint.
¶5 The facts set forth in the complaint are as follows:
In 2013, Attorney Trupke began serving as an independent
reviewer for the Center for Copyright Information (CCI). CCI is
a service offered through the American Arbitration Association
(AAA) in which an independent reviewer is appointed to consider
whether an individual may be violating copyright law or has a
valid defense. Once a CCI reviewer or AAA arbitrator completes
a matter, the parties pay a fee to AAA, which in turn pays the
reviewer or arbitrator.
¶6 Between January 2013 and June 2016, AAA paid Attorney
Trupke $73,025 for her work as a CCI reviewer. Attorney Trupke
2
No. 2017AP1465-D
did not report the $73,025 in CCI fees to her firm or to her
partners.
¶7 In 2013, Attorney Trupke opened a file at the firm for
an AAA matter. After working 28.10 hours on the matter, she
directed the firm's accounting department to write the time off.
She subsequently sent a personal invoice to AAA, requesting that
AAA send payment to her home. In March 2016, Attorney Trupke
gave misleading information to the firm's managing partner about
her work and income from CCI and AAA.
¶8 Attorney Trupke resigned from the firm in May 2016.
In June 2016, Attorney Trupke and the firm entered into a
reimbursement agreement in which Attorney Trupke waived certain
post resignation benefits to offset payments she owed to the
firm.
¶9 On January 2, 2018, the OLR and Attorney Trupke filed
a stipulation whereby Attorney Trupke withdrew her answer and
stipulated that she did not contest the alleged misconduct.
Specifically, Attorney Trupke stipulated that converting fees
belonging to the firm from 2013 through 2016 constitutes a
violation of SCR 20:8.4(c).1 Attorney Trupke stipulated further
that by converting fees owed to her law firm from 2013 through
2016, by misrepresenting to the firm the amount of fees she had
earned from 2013 through 2016, and in taking steps to ensure
1
SCR 20:8.4(c) provides: "It is professional misconduct
for a lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud,
deceit or misrepresentation."
3
No. 2017AP1465-D
that fees owed to the firm were paid directly to her instead of
the firm, she breached fiduciary duties owed to her firm and her
duty of honesty in her professional dealings with the firm,
thereby violating SCR 20:8.4(f).2
¶10 In the stipulation, Attorney Trupke stated that she
believed that her work as a CCI reviewer was educational in
nature, similar to educational services that law partners
performed for the law school, whereby partners were allowed to
retain some compensation under a firm honoraria policy.
¶11 Attorney Trupke added that all checks from the AAA
were sent to the firm's address, and her 1099s for 2014 and 2015
from the AAA were sent to the firm's address and were received
by the firm's accounting department. Attorney Trupke stated
that she was under the impression that the firm was aware of her
work for the CCI and AAA.
¶12 The OLR maintained that the firm was not aware of
Attorney Trupke's work as a CCI reviewer, nor her compensation
for it, and that Attorney Trupke's work as a CCI reviewer did
not fall within the firm's policy regarding honoraria.
¶13 The court directed the OLR to file a memorandum in
support of the stipulation with some additional information.
The OLR's subsequent memorandum and Attorney Trupke's memorandum
2
SCR 20:8.4(f) provides: "It is professional misconduct
for a lawyer to violate a statute, supreme court rule, supreme
court order or supreme court decision regulating the conduct of
lawyers." See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Shea, 190
Wis. 2d 560, 527 N.W.2d 314 (1995).
4
No. 2017AP1465-D
in response to the OLR's memo clarified that Attorney Trupke
fully intended to withdraw her response to the complaint and
that the recommended suspension was agreed upon based on
precedent and Attorney Trupke's desire to avoid a disciplinary
hearing. We accede to the parties' request to consider this
stipulation without appointment of a referee.
¶14 In the stipulation, Attorney Trupke affirms that the
stipulation did not result from plea bargaining; she fully
understands the misconduct allegations; she fully understands
her right to contest this matter; she fully understands her
right to consult with counsel; her entry into this stipulation
is made knowingly and voluntarily; her entry into this
stipulation represents her decision not to contest the
misconduct alleged in the complaint; and she assents to the
level of discipline requested by the OLR.
¶15 The stipulation requests that the court suspend
Attorney Trupke's license to practice law in Wisconsin for a
period of one year, which was the level of discipline originally
sought by the OLR in its complaint.
¶16 Acknowledging that the imposition of discipline in
attorney disciplinary cases is not an exact science, we conclude
that a one-year suspension is consistent with the level of
discipline imposed in somewhat similar cases. In considering
the appropriate sanction, we deem In re Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Brown, 2005 WI 49, 280 Wis. 2d 44, 695 N.W.2d 295,
instructive. There, Attorney Brown was suspended for 18 months
for, inter alia, accepting fees from clients totaling some
5
No. 2017AP1465-D
$16,000 while advising his firm that he was acting pro bono.
The nature of the misconduct in Brown was more serious than
here, and various mitigating factors support a lesser suspension
than he received. See also In re Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Elverman, 2008 WI 28, 308 Wis. 2d 524, 746 N.W.2d 793
(imposing nine-month suspension on attorney for failing to
report substantial co-trustee fees to his firm). These cases
are sufficiently analogous to support the imposition of a one-
year suspension here.
¶17 Accordingly, we accept the stipulation and impose the
requested one-year suspension. The OLR has not requested
restitution in light of the fact that Attorney Trupke made
arrangements to refund the firm. Accordingly, we do not order
any restitution. Finally, because the stipulation was filed at
the outset of this proceeding, thereby avoiding litigation costs
and the need to appoint a referee, we impose no costs on
Attorney Trupke.
¶18 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Amie B. Trupke to
practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period of one year,
effective June 5, 2018.
¶19 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Amie B. Trupke shall comply
with the provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of a
person whose license to practice law in Wisconsin has been
suspended.
6
No. 2017AP1465-D
1