Office of Lawyer Regulation v. William H. Green ( 2023 )

2023 WI 55SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN
CASE NO.: 2022AP1212-D
COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against William H. Green, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation,
Complainant,
v.
William H. Green,
Respondent.
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST GREEN
OPINION FILED: June 27, 2023
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS:
ORAL ARGUMENT:
SOURCE OF APPEAL:
COURT:
COUNTY:
JUDGE:
JUSTICES:
Per curiam.
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ATTORNEYS:
2023 WI 55NOTICE
This opinion is subject to further
editing and modification. The final
version will appear in the bound
volume of the official reports.
No. 2022AP1212-D
STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against
William H. Green, Attorney at Law:
FILED
Office of Lawyer Regulation, JUN 27, 2023
Complainant, Samuel A. Christensen
Clerk of Supreme Court
v.
William H. Green,
Respondent.
ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney’s license
suspended.
¶1 PER CURIAM. We review the recommendation of referee
Charles H. Barr that the court declare Attorney William H. Green
in default and suspend his license to practice law in Wisconsin
for a period of two years for 24 counts of professional
misconduct that arose out of six separate client matters. The
referee also recommended that Attorney Green be required to make
restitution to two clients and that he be required to comply
No. 2022AP1212-D
with two bankruptcy court disgorgement orders entered for the
benefit of other clients. Finally, the referee recommended that
Attorney Green be required to pay the full costs of this
proceeding, which are $707 as of April 11, 2023.
¶2 Since no appeal has been filed, we review the
referee's report pursuant to Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 22.17(2).1
After conducting an independent review of the matter, we agree
with the referee that, based on Attorney Green's failure to
answer the complaint filed by the Office of Lawyer Regulation
(OLR), OLR is entitled to a default judgment. We also agree
with the referee that Attorney Green's professional misconduct
warrants a two-year suspension of his Wisconsin law license. We
further agree that Attorney Green should be ordered to make
restitution, comply with the bankruptcy court disgorgement
orders, and bear the full costs of this proceeding.
¶3 Attorney Green was admitted to practice law in
Wisconsin in 1990. His address on file with the State Bar of
Wisconsin is in Brown Deer, Wisconsin. Attorney Green's law
license has been suspended since December 26, 2021 for non-
cooperation with OLR's investigations into his misconduct.
¶4 Attorney Green's disciplinary history consists of a
2014 private reprimand for failing to properly consult with
SCR 22.17(2) provides: "If no appeal is filed timely, the
1
supreme court shall review the referee's report; adopt, reject
or modify the referee's findings and conclusions or remand the
matter to the referee for additional findings; and determine and
impose appropriate discipline. The court, on its own motion, may
order the parties to file briefs in the matter."
2
No. 2022AP1212-D
clients about a bankruptcy issue, failing to keep the clients
informed, failing to diligently pursue the matter and not
holding or reporting fees correctly. Private Reprimand No.
2014-9.2 In 2016, Attorney Green was publicly reprimanded for
professional misconduct in three client matters involving lack
of competence, failure to pursue resolution of a client's
matters, and failing to comply with trust account rules. Public
Reprimand of William H. Green, No. 2016-8.3
¶5 On July 18, 2022, OLR filed the complaint underlying
this matter. The first four counts of misconduct alleged in the
complaint arose out of Attorney Green's representation of M.P.,
who hired Attorney Green in December 2017 to represent him in a
bankruptcy matter. M.P. agreed to pay Attorney Green $4,500 for
the representation and paid Attorney Green $1,140 before the
bankruptcy petition was filed.
¶6 Attorney Green filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition
for M.P. on December 27, 2017 in United States Bankruptcy Court
for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. On April 2, 2019, the
Chapter 13 Trustee moved to dismiss the bankruptcy because M.P.
had not been making the required payments. Attorney Green did
not respond to the Trustee's motion to dismiss or take any other
action to protect M.P.'s interest. The bankruptcy court
dismissed the case on April 29, 2019.
2 No electronic copy is available.
3Electronic copy available at
https://compendium.wicourts.gov/app/1f14304d736f3742230c29497964
233e33391845.continue?action=detail&detailOffset=2.
3
No. 2022AP1212-D
¶7 On June 27, 2019, Attorney Green filed a subsequent
Chapter 7 bankruptcy for M.P. On September 30, 2019, the Clerk
of Court notified Attorney Green that M.P. needed to take a
personal financial management course and file a certificate of
course completion within 60 days. M.P. did not take the
required course and filed no certificate. On December 3, 2019,
the bankruptcy court closed M.P.'s Chapter 7 case without a
discharge. The bankruptcy court's order stated that M.P. could
move to reopen the case and file the certificate if he paid the
full filing fee.
¶8 On January 2, 2020, M.P. completed the financial
management course and filed a certificate with the bankruptcy
court. In 2021, M.P. contacted Attorney Green about reopening
the bankruptcy, and Attorney Green told him the cost to reopen
the Chapter 7 case and obtain a discharge was $400. M.P. paid
Attorney Green the $400 on or about August 4, 2021.
¶9 Over the next two months, M.P. called Attorney Green
multiple times and also sent emails and texts asking about the
status of his bankruptcy. Attorney Green failed to respond, and
he did not move to reopen the bankruptcy.
¶10 On September 24, 2021, M.P. filed a grievance against
Attorney Green with OLR. On October 29, 2021, OLR sent Attorney
Green a notice of formal investigation and requested a response
by November 22, 2021.
¶11 On November 30, 2021, OLR wrote Attorney Green and
informed him it had not received a response. OLR provided
notice that if Attorney Green failed to respond within 20 days
4
No. 2022AP1212-D
or otherwise show an inability to provide the requested
information, or file a motion with this court indicating why his
license should not be suspended, his license to practice law
would be automatically suspended. OLR personally served
Attorney Green with the November 30th letter on December 6,
2021. Attorney Green did not respond. Effective December 26,
2021, Attorney Green's law license was automatically suspended
for his failure to cooperate with OLR's investigation in this
and other OLR investigative matters. Attorney Green has not
subsequently cooperated in the investigation and the suspension
remains in effect.
¶12 OLR's complaint alleged the following counts of
misconduct with respect to Attorney Green's representation of
M.P.:
Count 1: By failing to take meaningful action to
advance [M.P.'s] Chapter 13 and Chapter 7 bankruptcy
cases following the filing of the petitions,
[Attorney] Green violated SCR 20:1.3. 4
Count 2: By failing to respond to [M.P.'s] telephone
calls, emails and text messages seeking information
and assistance regarding his bankruptcy case,
[Attorney] Green violated SCR 20:1.4(a)(3) and (4).5
4 SCR 20:1.3 provides: "A lawyer shall act with reasonable
diligence and promptness in representing a client."
5 SCR 20:1.4(a)(3) and (4) provide: "A lawyer shall: (3)
keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the
matter; (4) promptly comply with reasonable requests by the
client for information."
5
No. 2022AP1212-D
Count 3: By failing to refund $400 in unearned fees to
[M.P.], [Attorney] Green violated SCR 20:1.16(d).6
Count 4: By failing to respond to OLR's October 29,
2021 notice of formal investigation, [Attorney] Green
violated SCR 22.03(2),[7] enforceable via SCR
20:8.4(h).8
¶13 The next client matter detailed in OLR's complaint
involved Attorney Green's representation of B.L., who hired him
to represent her in a bankruptcy matter in 2018. B.L. agreed to
pay Attorney Green $4,500 for the representation and paid him
$1,000 before he filed the bankruptcy petition.
6 SCR 20:1.16(d) provides: "Upon termination of
representation, a lawyer shall take steps to the extent
reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests, such as
giving reasonable notice to the client, allowing time for
employment of other counsel, surrendering papers and property to
which the client is entitled and refunding any advance payments
of fee or expense that has not been earned or incurred. The
lawyer may retain papers relating to the client to the extent
permitted by other law."
7 SCR 22.03(2) provides: "Upon commencing an investigation,
the director shall notify the respondent of the matter being
investigated unless in the opinion of the director the
investigation of the matter requires otherwise. The respondent
shall fully and fairly disclose all facts and circumstances
pertaining to the alleged misconduct within 20 days after being
served by ordinary mail a request for written response. The
director may allow additional time to respond. Following receipt
of the response, the director may conduct further investigation
and may compel the respondent to answer questions, furnish
documents, and present any information deemed relevant to the
investigation."
8 SCR 20:8.4(h) provides: "It is professional misconduct to
fail to cooperate in the investigation of a grievance filed with
the office of lawyer regulation as required by SCR 21.15(4), SCR
22.001(9)(b), SCR 22.03(2), SCR 22.03(6), or SCR 22.04(1)."
6
No. 2022AP1212-D
¶14 On July 17, 2018, Attorney Green filed a Chapter 13
bankruptcy petition for B.L. in United States Bankruptcy Court
for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Although Attorney Green
filed a proposed Chapter 13 plan with the petition, he was
unable to gain confirmation of the plan, and over the next 36
months he filed eight amendments to the plan. Attorney Green
missed multiple filing deadlines in the case, leading the
Chapter 13 Trustee to ask for dismissal on three occasions.
B.L. tried to contact Attorney Green multiple times and tried to
meet with him to discuss the status of her bankruptcy, but
Attorney Green did not substantively respond to her requests.
¶15 On March 29, 2021, Attorney Green filed a stipulation
with one of B.L.'s creditors. B.L. had not approved the
stipulation.
¶16 On April 28, 2021, the bankruptcy judge ordered
Attorney Green to file an amended plan by May 11, 2021. He
failed to do so.
¶17 On May 4, 2021, B.L. went to Attorney Green's office
but he would not meet with her. The following day, B.L. wrote
directly to the bankruptcy judge indicating that Attorney Green
was not communicating with her and that she no longer wanted him
to represent her.
¶18 On July 13, 2021, the bankruptcy judge held a hearing
on the Trustee's dismissal motion and B.L.'s letter to the
bankruptcy court. The bankruptcy court ordered Attorney Green
to file a motion to withdraw by July 16, 2021. Attorney Green
did not move to withdraw. On July 23, 2021, the bankruptcy
7
No. 2022AP1212-D
court ordered Attorney Green to appear in person on August 5,
2021 to show cause why the bankruptcy court should not sanction
him for failing to obey the July 13th order. Attorney Green
failed to appear at the August 5th hearing and did not otherwise
respond.
¶19 On August 6, 2021, the bankruptcy court terminated
Attorney Green's representation of B.L. and ordered Attorney
Green to disgorge $1,000 in fees to B.L. by September 7, 2021.
The bankruptcy court forwarded the August 6th order to OLR.
Attorney Green has not paid B.L. the $1,000 reimbursement
ordered by the bankruptcy court.
¶20 On September 15, 2021, the bankruptcy court ordered
Attorney Green to appear in person on October 14, 2021 to show
cause why the bankruptcy court should not sanction him further.
On October 14, 2021, Attorney Green wrote to the bankruptcy
court saying he could not appear due to transportation issues,
that he lacked $1,000 to pay B.L., and that he had health
issues.
¶21 On October 15, 2021, the bankruptcy court entered
judgment against Attorney Green for $1,000 and barred him from
filing any new bankruptcy cases in the Eastern District.
¶22 On October 29, 2021, OLR sent Attorney Green a notice
of formal investigation regarding the bankruptcy court's
referral and requested a response by November 22, 2021. This
was the same time frame as the notice sent to Attorney Green in
M.P.'s case. As with M.P.'s case, Attorney Green failed to
respond to OLR, and his law license was automatically suspended
8
No. 2022AP1212-D
on December 26, 2021. Attorney Green has not subsequently
cooperated in the investigation in B.L.'s case, and the
suspension remains in effect.
¶23 The complaint alleged the following counts of
misconduct arising out of Attorney Green's representation of
B.L.:
Count 5: By failing to take meaningful action to
advance [B.L.]'s bankruptcy case over a 36 month
period, including failing to meet multiple deadlines
associated with the case and causing the Trustee to
file multiple motions to dismiss the bankruptcy case,
[Attorney] Green violated SCR 20:1.3.
Count 6: By failing to keep [B.L.] reasonably informed
regarding the status of her case, and by failing to
respond to [B.L.]'s numerous telephone calls seeking
information and assistance regarding the bankruptcy
case, including refusing to meet with [B.L.] on May 4,
2021, [Attorney] Green violated SCR 20:1.4(a)(3) and
(4).
Count 7: By failing to comply with the court's April
28, 2021, July 13, 2021, July 23, 2021, August 6,
2021, and September 15, 2021 orders in [B.L.]'s
bankruptcy proceeding, [Attorney] Green, in each
instance, violated SCR 20:3.4(c).9
Count 8: By failing to refund $1,000 in unearned fees
to [B.L.], [Attorney] Green violated SCR 20:1.16(d).
Count 9: By failing to respond to OLR's October 29,
2021 notice of formal investigation, [Attorney] Green
violated SCR 22.03(2), enforceable via SCR 20:8.4(h).
¶24 The next client matter detailed in OLR's complaint
involved Attorney Green's representation of T.B. and J.B. (the
9SCR 20:3.4(c) provides: "A lawyer shall not knowingly
disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal, except for
an open refusal based on an assertion that no valid obligation
exists."
9
No. 2022AP1212-D
Bs), who hired Attorney Green to represent them in a bankruptcy
matter in 2019. The Bs agreed to pay Attorney Green $4,000 for
the representation and paid him $1,573 prior to filing a
bankruptcy petition.
¶25 On November 16, 2019, Attorney Green filed a Chapter
13 bankruptcy petition on behalf of the Bs in United States
Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. The
Bank of New York Mellon (Mellon) was the Trustee for the holders
of a second mortgage on the Bs' home. On June 2, 2020, the Bs
and Mellon agreed to lift the automatic stay on Mellon's claims
to the home.
¶26 On September 1, 2020, the bankruptcy court confirmed
the Bs' Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition and plan. As part of the
plan, the Bs were required to make monthly payments and provide
tax returns to the bankruptcy Trustee. In the first half of
2021, the Bs gave their 2020 tax returns to Attorney Green, but
he did not forward them to the Trustee.
¶27 In March 2021, Mellon filed a foreclosure action
against the Bs in Milwaukee County circuit court. The Bs
notified Attorney Green of the foreclosure action and repeatedly
called, texted, and emailed him over the next few months.
Attorney Green did not respond to the Bs' efforts to contact
him.
¶28 On June 26, 2021, the circuit court in the foreclosure
case scheduled a hearing on a default motion against the Bs for
July 26, 2021. On July 21, 2021, Attorney Green entered an
appearance in the foreclosure case. Attorney Green appeared at
10
No. 2022AP1212-D
the hearing on Mellon's default motion on July 26, 2021. The
circuit court granted the default and set another hearing for
August 9, 2021 to address the foreclosure judgment motion.
Attorney Green failed to appear at the scheduled hearing on
August 9, 2021, and the circuit court granted a foreclosure
judgment against the Bs.
¶29 On September 21, 2021, the Bs filed a grievance with
OLR claiming that since March 2021 Attorney Green had not
responded to their numerous phone calls and emails and, because
of the foreclosure judgment, they were no longer able to work on
a payment plan with Mellon.
¶30 On September 29, 2021, the bankruptcy Trustee moved to
dismiss the bankruptcy because the Bs had not made the required
payments and had failed to provide tax returns to the Trustee.
Attorney Green failed to respond to the Trustee's motion to
dismiss or take any other steps to advance the Bs' bankruptcy.
¶31 On October 27, 2021, the bankruptcy court dismissed
the Bs' case. Attorney Green had received $521.59 toward his
fees through the Chapter 13 plan.
¶32 On November 24, 2021, the Bs filed a new Chapter 13
bankruptcy petition with new counsel. On December 3, 2021, the
bankruptcy court ordered Attorney Green to appear in person on
January 5, 2022 and show cause why his attorney's fees should
not be disgorged and why other sanctions should not be imposed
on him. Attorney Green failed to respond to the bankruptcy
court order or appear on January 5, 2022.
11
No. 2022AP1212-D
¶33 On January 6, 2022, the bankruptcy court ordered
Attorney Green to disgorge $2,094.59 in fees and pay that amount
to the Bs. Attorney Green has not paid any part of the ordered
amount to the Bs.
¶34 On October 30, 2021, OLR sent Attorney Green a notice
of formal investigation in the Bs' matter and requested a
response on or before November 22, 2021. As with the other
notices of formal investigation, Attorney Green failed to
respond, and effective December 26, 2021, his Wisconsin law
license was automatically suspended for failure to cooperate
with OLR's investigation. Attorney Green has not subsequently
cooperated in the investigation of the Bs' grievance, and the
suspension remains in effect.
¶35 OLR's complaint alleged the following counts of
misconduct with respect to Attorney Green's representation of
the Bs:
Count 10: By failing to appear at the hearing on
Mellon's motion for default judgment and foreclosure,
resulting in a judgment of foreclosure, and, in
addition, by failing to take any action to respond to
the Trustee's motion to dismiss the bankruptcy action,
resulting in the dismissal of the [Bs]' bankruptcy
proceeding, [Attorney] Green violated SCR 20:1.3.
Count 11: By failing to keep the [Bs] reasonably
informed regarding the status of their cases, and by
failing to respond to the [Bs]' numerous telephone
calls, emails and texts requesting information and
assistance regarding both the foreclosure action and
the bankruptcy case, [Attorney] Green violated SCR
20:1.4(a)(3) and (4).
Count 12: By failing to comply with the court's
December 3, 2021 and January 6, 2022 orders,
12
No. 2022AP1212-D
[Attorney] Green, in each instance, violated SCR
20:3.4(c).
Count 13: By failing to refund unearned fees to the
[Bs], [Attorney] Green violated SCR 20:1.16(d).
Count 14: By failing to respond to the OLR's October
30, 2021 notice of formal investigation, [Attorney]
Green violated SCR 22.03(2), enforceable via SCR
20:8.4(h).
¶36 OLR's complaint also alleged that Attorney Green
engaged in professional misconduct in his representation of
K.M., who hired him in November 2019 to file a termination of
parental rights case with step-parent adoption of her son. K.M.
agreed to pay Attorney Green $4,000 for the representation. She
paid him $2,000 in November 2019 and then paid $150 per month
toward the remaining $2,000. By January 2021, Attorney Green
had received full payment.
¶37 Attorney Green took no action on K.M.'s behalf. K.M.
tried to contact Attorney Green through phone calls, emails, and
texts, but Attorney Green never substantively responded.
¶38 On October 19, 2021, K.M. filed a grievance against
Attorney Green with OLR. On October 29, 2021, K.M. emailed
Attorney Green and requested a full refund of the $4,000
attorney's fees she had paid. Attorney Green failed to respond.
¶39 On November 22, 2021, OLR sent Attorney Green a notice
of formal investigation and requested a response by December 15,
2021. As with the previous notices of formal investigation,
Attorney Green failed to respond. Effective January 8, 2022,
his law license was automatically suspended for his failure to
cooperate with OLR's investigation in the matter. Attorney
13
No. 2022AP1212-D
Green has not subsequently cooperated in the investigation of
K.M.'s grievance, and the suspension remains in effect.
¶40 The complaint alleged the following counts of
misconduct arising out of Attorney Green's representation of
K.M.:
Count 15: By failing to take any action on [K.M.]'s
behalf to file a termination of parental rights and
step-parent adoption case, [Attorney] Green violated
SCR 20:1.3.
Count 16: By failing to keep [K.M.] reasonably
informed regarding the status of her case, and by
failing to respond to [K.M.]'s numerous telephone
calls and emails requesting information regarding the
case, [Attorney] Green violated SCR 20:1.4(a)(3) and
(4).
Count 17: By failing to respond to [K.M.]'s request
for a refund, [Attorney] Green violated SCR
20:1.5(b)(3). 10
Count 18: By failing to refund unearned fees to
[K.M.], [Attorney] Green violated SCR 20:1.16(d).
Count 19: By failing to respond to OLR's notice of
formal investigation dated November 22, 2021,
[Attorney] Green violated SCR 22.03(2), enforceable
via SCR 20:8.4(h).
¶41 OLR's complaint further alleged that Attorney Green
committed professional misconduct with respect to his
representation of J.W., Jr., who hired Attorney Green to
represent him in a bankruptcy matter in 2020. J.W. agreed to
10 SCR 20:1.5(b)(3) provides: "A lawyer shall promptly
respond to a client's request for information concerning fees
and expenses."
14
No. 2022AP1212-D
pay Attorney Green $4,500 for the representation and paid him
$1,000 prior to the filing.
¶42 On May 29, 2020, Attorney Green filed a Chapter 13
bankruptcy petition on J.W.'s behalf in United States Bankruptcy
Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Attorney Green
filed multiple amendments to the original Chapter 13 plan, all
of which drew objections from the Trustee and/or creditors.
¶43 On July 20, 2020, the bankruptcy court ordered J.W. to
give the Trustee specific documents and file an amended plan
addressing specific issues. Attorney Green failed to file an
amended plan or give the requested documents to the trustee.
¶44 On September 2, 2020, the Trustee moved to dismiss the
bankruptcy for failure to comply with the July 20th order. On
September 29, 2020, the bankruptcy court denied the Trustee's
motion to dismiss, but re-ordered J.W. to provide the
documentation and make changes to the bankruptcy plan.
¶45 On November 4, 2020, the Trustee filed another motion
to dismiss because J.W. had failed to make payments as required
under the proposed plan. On December 4, 2020, the bankruptcy
court dismissed J.W.'s bankruptcy proceeding.
¶46 On February 23, 2021, Attorney Green filed a new
Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition on behalf of J.W. This proposed
bankruptcy plan was substantively the same as the one in the
earlier case that had failed to win confirmation. On March 26,
2021, the Trustee moved to dismiss J.W.'s new bankruptcy plan,
alleging the filing was not in good faith due to the plan's
similarity to the prior one and due to J.W.'s failure to make
15
No. 2022AP1212-D
payments or attend the scheduled meeting with creditors.
Attorney Green failed to respond to this motion. On April 20,
2021, the bankruptcy court granted the Trustee's motion and
dismissed J.W.'s second petition.
¶47 On September 9, 2021, J.W. filed a grievance against
Attorney Green with OLR. On October 28, 2021, OLR sent Attorney
Green a notice of formal investigation. As with the previous
notices of formal investigation, Attorney Green failed to
respond, and effective December 26, 2021, his law license was
automatically suspended. Attorney Green has not subsequently
cooperated in the investigation into J.W.'s grievance, and the
suspension remains in effect.
¶48 The OLR's complaint alleged the following counts of
misconduct arising out of Attorney Green's representation of
J.W.:
Count 20: By failing to take meaningful action to
advance [J.W.]'s bankruptcy case following the filing
of two petitions, [Attorney] Green violated SCR
20:1.3.
Count 21: By failing to comply with the court's July
20, 2020 and September 29, 2020 orders in [J.W.]'s
bankruptcy proceeding, [Attorney] Green, in each
instance, violated SCR 20:3.4(c).
Count 22: By failing to respond to OLR's October 28,
2021 notice of formal investigation, [Attorney] Green
violated SCR 22.03(2), enforceable via SCR 20:8.4(h).
¶49 The final client matter detailed in OLR's complaint
concerned Attorney Green's representation of J.V. J.V. hired
Attorney Green in August 2021 to represent her in a pending
divorce action as well as in a juvenile proceeding. In
16
No. 2022AP1212-D
September 2021, Attorney Green stopped responding to J.V.'s
requests for information and advice.
¶50 On October 7, 2021, Attorney Green moved to withdraw
in the juvenile case, claiming health issues. J.V. was unable
to obtain a copy of her file from Attorney Green or gain access
to electronic court filings in her cases.
¶51 On October 12, 2021, J.V. filed a grievance against
Attorney Green with OLR. On November 5, 2021, OLR sent Attorney
Green a notice of formal investigation. As with the previously
detailed notices of formal investigation, Attorney Green failed
to respond, and effective January 2, 2022, his law license was
automatically suspended. Attorney Green has not subsequently
cooperated in OLR's investigation into J.V.'s grievance, and the
suspension remains in effect.
¶52 The complaint alleged the following counts of
misconduct with respect to Attorney Green's representation of
J.V.:
Count 23: By failing to promptly return [J.V.]'s file,
[Attorney] Green violated SCR 20:1.16(d).
Count 24: By failing to respond to OLR's notice of
formal investigation dated November 5, 2021,
[Attorney] Green violated SCR 22.03(2), enforceable
via SCR 20:8.4(h).
¶53 After OLR made several unsuccessful attempts to serve
Attorney Green personally with the complaint and order to
answer, he was served by certified mail by sending an
authenticated copy of the complaint and order to answer to the
most recent address on file with the State Bar on August 8,
17
No. 2022AP1212-D
2022. His answer or other response to the complaint was due
October 16, 2022. A telephonic scheduling conference was held
on October 20, 2022. Only counsel for OLR appeared, and counsel
expressed OLR's intention to file a motion for default judgment.
OLR's counsel represented that to the best of his knowledge,
based on OLR's investigation, Attorney Green was not then
engaged in and appeared to have abandoned the practice of law.
The referee adjourned the scheduling conference pending OLR's
filing of a motion for default judgment.
¶54 OLR filed its motion for default judgment on December
15, 2022. Pursuant to the notice, a telephonic hearing on the
motion was held on January 20, 2023. Again, only counsel for
OLR appeared at the hearing. On January 23, 2023, the referee
issued an order finding that OLR had complied with the
requirements for substituted service under SCR 22.13(1),11 that
no answer or any other response to the complaint had been served
or filed by Attorney Green or on his behalf, that the time for
doing so had expired, and that Attorney Green was therefore in
default. Notwithstanding the finding of default, the referee's
January 23, 2023 order provided that if Attorney Green served
and filed a response to the complaint within 30 days, the
SCR 22.13(1) provides: "The complaint and order to answer
11
shall be served upon the respondent in the same manner as a
summons under section 801.11(1) of the statutes. If, with
reasonable diligence, the respondent cannot be served under
section 801.11(1)(a) or (b) of the statutes, service may be made
by sending by certified mail an authenticated copy of the
complaint and order to answer to the most recent address
furnished by the respondent to the state bar."
18
No. 2022AP1212-D
referee would rescind the finding of default. No answer or
other response to the complaint has been filed.
¶55 On March 22, 2023, the referee issued a report and a
recommendation recommending that this court grant the OLR's
motion for default judgment. The referee found that OLR
complied with SCR 22.13(1) and properly served the complaint and
order to answer on Attorney Green. The referee found that the
OLR made reasonable and good faith attempts, above and beyond
the attempts necessary to satisfy the requirements of SCR
22.13(1), to provide Attorney Green with actual knowledge of the
proceeding and that further attempts to contact him would be
futile.
¶56 The referee deemed all of the allegations in OLR's
complaint established. The referee found that OLR had met its
burden of proof with respect to all of the counts of
professional misconduct alleged in the complaint.
¶57 With respect to the appropriate sanction, the referee
noted that because Attorney Green has previously received both a
private reprimand and a public reprimand, the doctrine of
progressive discipline strongly suggests the appropriateness of
a suspension, particularly since the nature of the misconduct in
this case bears substantial similarity to the misconduct that
resulted in the two reprimands. The referee found that, in
significant respects, this case was similar to In re
Disciplinary Proceedings Against Rostollan, 2018 WI 38, 381
Wis.2d 5, 911 N.W.2d 112, in which this court imposed a two-year
license suspension. Attorney Rostollan was found to have
19
No. 2022AP1212-D
committed 21 counts of professional misconduct involving three
clients. He had no prior disciplinary history. Like Attorney
Green, Attorney Rostollan was also found to be in default, and
at the time the case reached this court, Attorney Rostollan's
license had also been temporarily suspended for his failure to
cooperate in an OLR investigation.
¶58 The referee said the scope of misconduct in Rostollan
and the instant case was roughly comparable. The referee said
given that Attorney Green has been previously disciplined, and
Attorney Rostollan had not been, the suspension imposed here
should be no shorter than the suspension imposed in Rostollan.
The referee reasoned that the progression from a public
reprimand to a two-year suspension was significant and would
properly reflect the scope and gravity of Attorney Green's
misconduct. The referee believed that a two-year suspension
would also serve to deter other attorneys from engaging in
similar misconduct.
¶59 The referee further recommended that Attorney Green be
ordered to pay restitution of $400 to M.P. and $4,000 to K.M.,
and that he also be ordered to comply with the two bankruptcy
court disgorgement orders, one for the benefit of B.L. in the
amount of $1,000 and the other for the benefit of the Bs in the
amount of $2,094.59. Finally, the referee recommended that
Attorney Green be required to pay the full costs of this
proceeding.
¶60 We review a referee's findings of fact subject to the
clearly erroneous standard. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings
20
No. 2022AP1212-D
Against Eisenberg, 2004 WI 14, ¶5, 269 Wis.2d 43, 675 N.W.2d
747. We review the referee's conclusions of law de novo. Id.We determine the appropriate level of discipline independent of
the referee's recommendation. See In re Disciplinary
Proceedings Against Widule, 2003 WI 34, ¶44, 261 Wis.2d 45, 660
N.W.2d 686.
¶61 In light of Attorney Green's failure to appear or
participate in this case, we agree with the referee that
Attorney Green should be declared in default. We also find that
the referee properly relied on the allegations of the complaint,
which were deemed admitted. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Roitburd, 2016 WI 12, ¶19, 368 Wis.2d 595, 882 N.W.2d
317.
¶62 We agree with the referee that the allegations in
OLR's complaint have been established and that Attorney Green
engaged in the 24 counts of misconduct alleged in the complaint.
We also agree that a two-year suspension of Attorney Green's
license to practice law in Wisconsin is an appropriate sanction
for the misconduct. Although no two disciplinary proceedings
are alike, we agree with the referee that this case is
substantially similar to Rostollan. We agree that a two-year
license suspension is required to impress on Attorney Green the
seriousness of his extensive misconduct and deter other
attorneys from engaging in similar misconduct in the future.
¶63 We also accept the referee's recommendation that
Attorney Green be required to make restitution to M.P. and K.M.
and that he also be required to comply with the two bankruptcy
21
No. 2022AP1212-D
court disgorgement orders. Finally, we agree, consistent with
our standard practice, that Attorney Green should bear the full
costs of this proceedings which are $707 as of April 11, 2023.
¶64 IT IS ORDERED that the license of William H. Green to
practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period of two
years, effective the date of this order.
¶65 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent he has not
already done so, William H. Green 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.
¶66 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date
of this order, William H. Green shall pay restitution to M.P. in
the amount of $400 and to K.M. in the amount of $4,000.
¶67 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that William H. Green shall
comply with the bankruptcy court disgorgement orders requiring
him to disgorge $1,000 in fees to B.L. and to disgorge $2,094.59
in fees to the Bs.
¶68 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date
of this order, William H. Green shall pay to the Office of
Lawyer Regulation the costs of this proceeding.
¶69 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the restitution is to be
completed prior to paying costs to the Office of Lawyer
Regulation.
¶70 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that compliance with all
conditions of this order is required for reinstatement. See SCR
22.29(4)(c).
22
No. 2022AP1212-D
¶71 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the temporary suspensions
of William H. Green's license to practice law issued on December
26, 2021, January 2, 2022, and January 8, 2022 are hereby
lifted.
¶72 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any administrative
suspension of William H. Green's license to practice law due to
his failure to pay mandatory bar dues and failure to comply with
continuing legal education requirements remains in effect.
23
No. 2022AP1212-D
1