Case Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Jeffrey A. Kline

Citation: 2010 WI 29

Docket Number: 2009AP001938-D

State: wisconsin

Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Date: 2010-04-28T00:00:00Z

Document:
2010 WI 29 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2009AP1938-D 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings  
Against Jeffrey A. Kline, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
Jeffrey A. Kline, 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST KLINE 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
April 28, 2010   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
        
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:         
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
      
 
 
 
 
2010 WI 29
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.  2009AP1938-D  
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings  
Against Jeffrey A. Kline, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Jeffrey A. Kline, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
APR 28, 2010 
 
David R. Schanker 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY 
disciplinary 
proceeding.   
Attorney's 
license 
revoked.   
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.   The Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) 
has filed a complaint seeking discipline identical to that 
imposed in Illinois, where Attorney Jeffrey A. Kline has been 
disbarred.  Michael F. Dubis was appointed referee.  After a 
default hearing, Referee Dubis concluded Attorney Kline is 
subject to reciprocal discipline in Wisconsin.  Referee Dubis 
recommends Attorney Kline be disbarred and that he pay the costs 
of this proceeding. 
No. 
2009AP1938-D   
 
2 
 
¶2 
Because no appeal has been filed, we review the 
referee's report pursuant to SCR 22.17(2).1  Upon our independent 
review of the record, we approve and adopt the referee's 
findings and conclusions.  We determine that by virtue of having 
been disbarred in Illinois for violation of the Illinois Rules 
of Professional Conduct, Attorney Kline is subject to reciprocal 
discipline pursuant to SCR 22.22.2  We order Attorney Kline's 
                                                 
1 SCR 22.17(2) provides: 
If no appeal is filed timely, the 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 SCR 22.22 provides, in pertinent part, as follows:  
Reciprocal discipline. 
(2) Upon the receipt of a certified copy of a 
judgment or order of another jurisdiction imposing 
discipline for misconduct or a license suspension for 
medical incapacity of an attorney admitted to the 
practice of law or engaged in the practice of law in 
this state, the director may file a complaint in the 
supreme court.  . . .  
(3) The supreme court shall impose the identical 
discipline or license suspension unless one or more of 
the following is present: 
(a) The procedure in the other jurisdiction was 
so lacking in notice or opportunity to be heard as to 
constitute a deprivation of due process. 
(b) There 
was 
such 
an 
infirmity 
of 
proof 
establishing the misconduct or medical incapacity that 
the supreme court could not accept as final the 
conclusion in respect to the misconduct or medical 
incapacity. 
No. 
2009AP1938-D   
 
3 
 
license to practice law in Wisconsin to be revoked and that 
Attorney Kline bear the costs of this proceeding. 
¶3 
Attorney Kline was admitted to practice law in 
Illinois in 1992 and in Wisconsin in 1993.  He practiced in 
Rockford, Illinois.  Effective June 2, 1998, Attorney Kline's 
Wisconsin law license was suspended for failing to comply with 
continuing legal education requirements.  His license remains 
suspended. 
¶4 
On September 16, 2008, the Attorney Registration and 
Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Illinois ("the 
Commission") issued an order and judgment of disbarment of 
Attorney Kline's law license.  Attorney Kline's misconduct, 
considered by the Commission, includes charges for driving under 
the influence and pleading guilty to a lesser charge of reckless 
driving, a Class A misdemeanor; a conviction of aggravated 
driving under the influence, a Class 4 felony; and the failure 
                                                                                                                                                             
(c) The 
misconduct 
justifies 
substantially 
different discipline in this state. 
(4) Except as provided in sub. (3), a final 
adjudication in another jurisdiction that an attorney 
has engaged in misconduct . . . shall be conclusive 
evidence of the attorney's misconduct . . . . 
(5) The supreme court may refer a complaint filed 
under sub. (2) to a referee for a hearing and a report 
and recommendation pursuant to SCR 22.16. At the 
hearing, the burden is on the party seeking the 
imposition 
of 
discipline 
or 
license 
suspension 
different from that imposed in the other jurisdiction 
to demonstrate 
that the imposition of identical 
discipline or license suspension by the supreme court 
is unwarranted. 
No. 
2009AP1938-D   
 
4 
 
of Attorney Kline to notify the Commission within 30 days after 
his judgment of conviction.  The Commission also considered that 
Attorney Kline engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, 
deceit, and misrepresentation by failing to pay child support 
and 
disseminating 
marital 
assets, 
totaling 
$107,040, 
by 
transferring funds to a bank in Costa Rica.  The Commission 
concluded Attorney Kline engaged in conduct which tends to 
defeat the administration of justice in violation of the 
Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct.    
¶5 
The exhibits filed with the OLR complaint indicate 
that Attorney Kline is believed to be living in Costa Rica.  In 
August 2007 an investigator's communications with the United 
States Embassy in San Jose, Costa Rica, confirmed that Attorney 
Kline was believed to be residing in Costa Rica.  The 
investigator stated she had sent a copy of the Illinois 
disciplinary complaint and accompanying documents by regular 
mail to Attorney Kline's last registered business and home 
addresses.  Attorney Kline did not file an answer or otherwise 
respond to the Illinois disciplinary complaint, failed to appear 
for his discovery deposition, failed to produce documents, and 
failed to file a report disclosing potential witnesses as 
required by the Commission's rules.  On November 6, 2007, the 
Commission's motion to deem the allegations of the complaint 
admitted was granted. 
¶6 
Pursuant to the OLR's motion, this court issued an 
order on August 4, 2009, directing Attorney Kline to inform the 
court of any potential claim under SCR 22.22(3) that the 
No. 
2009AP1938-D   
 
5 
 
imposition of discipline identical to that imposed in Illinois 
would be unwarranted.  The order directed Attorney Kline to so 
inform the court by August 18, 2009, and, if no response were 
received, the court would proceed under SCR 22.22.  No response 
from Attorney Kline has been received. 
¶7 
On September 18, 2009, the OLR filed an affidavit 
pursuant to SCR 22.13(1) that it had mailed, by certified mail, 
the complaint, motion, and order to answer to Attorney Kline's 
most recent address furnished to the State Bar of Wisconsin.3  
The OLR also filed an affidavit of non-service by the Sheriff of 
Winnebago County, Illinois.  The OLR requested the appointment 
of a referee.   
¶8 
Following the appointment of Referee Dubis, the OLR 
filed a notice of motion and motion for default judgment.  The 
OLR stated that Attorney Kline's answer was past due and, on 
information and belief, he had left the country. 
¶9 
On November 20, 2009, the referee filed a notice 
scheduling a hearing on the OLR's motion for default judgment on 
December 16, 2009.  The notice provided directions to Attorney 
Kline in the event he wished to appear by telephone.  The notice 
stated that failure to appear may result in default judgment.  
                                                 
3 SCR 22.13(1) provides, in pertinent part, as follows: 
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.  
No. 
2009AP1938-D   
 
6 
 
The 
referee 
filed 
an 
affidavit, 
signed 
by 
his 
office 
administrator, which stated on November 20, 2009, she sent to 
Attorney Kline by certified mail the notice of hearing pursuant 
to SCR 22.13(1).  
¶10 On January 14, 2010, the referee filed his report and 
recommendation.  The referee stated that Attorney Kline had been 
served with the complaint and motion and failed to appear or 
contest the proceedings.  The referee incorporated into his 
findings the allegations of the OLR complaint.  The referee 
found that on September 16, 2008, Attorney Kline was ordered 
disbarred in Illinois.  The referee also found that Attorney 
Kline failed to notify the OLR of the Illinois discipline within 
20 days of its effective date, and failed to inform the court of 
any reason why discipline identical to that imposed in Illinois 
should not be imposed in Wisconsin.   
¶11 The referee concluded Attorney Kline was in default 
and the allegations contained in the OLR's complaint were deemed 
admitted.  The referee concluded Attorney Kline had violated SCR 
22.22(1)4 by failing to notify the OLR within 20 days of the 
effective date of his Illinois disbarment.  The referee 
                                                 
4 SCR 22.22(1) provides: 
An 
attorney 
on 
whom 
public 
discipline 
for 
misconduct 
or 
a 
license 
suspension 
for 
medical 
incapacity has been imposed by another jurisdiction 
shall promptly notify the director of the matter.  
Failure to furnish the notice within 20 days of the 
effective date of the order or judgment of the other 
jurisdiction constitutes misconduct. 
No. 
2009AP1938-D   
 
7 
 
concluded Attorney Kline is subject to reciprocal discipline and 
recommended he be disbarred from practicing law in Wisconsin and 
be ordered to pay the costs of this proceeding.   
¶12 We approve and adopt the referee's findings and 
conclusions, which are unchallenged.  Service upon Attorney 
Kline of the pleadings has been accomplished pursuant to SCR 
22.13(1).  Attorney Kline has not filed an answer to the 
complaint and has not entered an appearance in this matter.  The 
time to do so has expired.  We conclude the OLR is entitled to a 
default judgment that Attorney Kline is subject to reciprocal 
discipline pursuant to SCR 22.22.  We order Attorney Kline's 
license to practice law in Wisconsin be revoked and that 
Attorney Kline bear the costs of this proceeding.5 
¶13 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Jeffrey A. Kline to 
practice law in Wisconsin is revoked, effective the date of this 
order. 
¶14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 90 days of the date 
of this order, Jeffrey A. Kline pay to the Office of Lawyer 
Regulation the costs of the proceeding.   
¶15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Jeffrey A. Kline shall 
comply with SCR 22.26 regarding the duties of a person whose 
license to practice law in Wisconsin has been revoked. 
 
                                                 
5 The OLR filed a statement of costs on February 3, 2010, 
indicating total costs of $765.12. 
No. 
2009AP1938-D   
 
 
 
1