Case Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Michael Leslie Cummings

Citation: 

Docket Number: 2017AP001255-D

State: wisconsin

Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Date: 2018-01-19T00:00:00Z

Document:
2018 WI 8 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2017AP1255-D 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Michael Leslie Cummings, Attorney at 
Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
Michael Leslie Cummings, 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST CUMMINGS 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
January 19, 2018 
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
      
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
      
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
      
 
COUNTY: 
      
 
JUDGE: 
      
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
      
 
DISSENTED: 
      
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:          
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
 
      
 
 
2018 WI 8
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.   2017AP1255-D 
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Michael Leslie Cummings, Attorney 
at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Michael Leslie Cummings, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
JAN 19, 2018 
 
Diane M. Fremgen 
Acting Clerk of 
Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY 
disciplinary 
proceeding.   Attorney's 
license 
suspended.   
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.   In this disciplinary matter we are asked 
to determine whether Attorney Michael Leslie Cummings' license 
to practice law in Wisconsin should be suspended for a period of 
six months, as discipline reciprocal to that imposed by the 
Supreme Court of Illinois.   
¶2 
After reviewing this matter, we conclude that Attorney 
Cummings' license to practice law in this state should be 
suspended for a period of six months.  In light of the fact that 
No. 
2017AP1255-D   
 
2 
 
Attorney Cummings has not contested the OLR's complaint and 
there has not been a need for the appointment of a referee, we 
do not impose the costs of this proceeding on Attorney Cummings. 
¶3 
The Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) initiated this 
proceeding by filing a complaint, an order to answer, and a 
motion pursuant to Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 22.22(3),1 requesting 
the court to order Attorney Cummings to show cause, in writing, 
why the imposition of discipline identical to that imposed in 
Illinois would be unwarranted.  The OLR's complaint contained 
two counts:  (1) that Attorney Cummings is subject to discipline 
reciprocal to a six-month suspension in Illinois and (2) that 
Attorney Cummings had violated SCR 22.22(1)2 by failing to notify 
                                                 
1 SCR 22.22(3) provides 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.   
 
(c) The 
misconduct 
justifies 
substantially 
different discipline in this state. 
2 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 
(continued) 
No. 
2017AP1255-D   
 
3 
 
the OLR of the Illinois suspension.  This court issued the 
requested order to show cause, but Attorney Cummings did not 
file a response.  He also has not filed an answer or other 
response to the OLR's complaint.  Accordingly, we proceed with 
the resolution of this matter pursuant to SCR 22.22(3). 
¶4 
Attorney Cummings was admitted to the practice of law 
in Illinois in 1995.  He was also admitted to the practice of 
law in this state in November 1997.  According to the Illinois 
disciplinary materials attached to the OLR's complaint, Attorney 
Cummings had been practicing law as an associate attorney at a 
law firm in Highland Park, Illinois, at the time of the 
underlying events, but he was unemployed as of early 2017. 
¶5 
Prior to this proceeding, Attorney Cummings has not 
been the subject of professional discipline in this state.  His 
license to practice law in Wisconsin, however, has been 
administratively suspended since October 2000 for failure to pay 
mandatory bar dues and supreme court assessments. 
¶6 
According to the Illinois disciplinary records, the 
Illinois license suspension arose out of a mechanic's lien 
matter that was assigned to Attorney Cummings by the firm at 
which he worked.  Specifically, in May 2014 Attorney Cummings 
was directed to have a mechanic's lien prepared and recorded on 
behalf of a client that was a subcontractor on a multi-unit 
residential construction project in Campbell County, Kentucky.  
                                                                                                                                                             
order 
or 
judgment 
of 
the 
other 
jurisdiction 
constitutes misconduct. 
No. 
2017AP1255-D   
 
4 
 
Because Attorney Cummings was not licensed to practice law in 
Kentucky, he contacted a Kentucky lawyer to handle the matter.  
Attorney Cummings was supposed to provide that lawyer with the 
information necessary for the lawyer to prepare and record the 
mechanic's lien.  In order for the subcontractor's lien to be 
valid under Kentucky law, the subcontractor was required to 
provide to the property owner notice of its intent to record the 
mechanic's lien against the property on or before August 12, 
2014.  As of that date, however, Attorney Cummings had not 
provided the necessary information to the Kentucky lawyer so no 
such notice was given. 
¶7 
At some point between August 12 and 21, 2014, Attorney 
Cummings fabricated a document that purported to be a mechanic's 
lien that had been recorded in Campbell County, Kentucky, on 
behalf of the subcontractor.  Attorney Cummings delivered the 
fraudulent lien to the client and falsely represented that it 
had been properly recorded. 
¶8 
The client soon discovered that Attorney Cummings' 
mechanic's lien was fraudulent and that no mechanic's lien had 
been recorded on its behalf.  The client sued both Attorney 
Cummings and his law firm in December 2015.  In February 2016 
the law firm terminated Attorney Cummings' employment.  In May 
2016 Attorney Cummings paid a settlement to the now former 
client. 
¶9 
The Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary 
Commission (ARDC) filed a disciplinary petition regarding the 
mechanic's lien matter, alleging that Attorney Cummings had 
No. 
2017AP1255-D   
 
5 
 
failed to act with reasonable diligence, in violation of Rule 
1.3 of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (IRPC); had 
failed to keep his client reasonably informed about the status 
of the lien matter, in violation of IRPC 1.4(a)(3); and had 
engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or 
misrepresentation, in violation of IRPC 8.4(c).  Based on a 
number of Illinois disciplinary precedents and consideration of 
both aggravating and mitigating factors, including Attorney 
Cummings' remorse for his misconduct, the ARDC requested a six-
month suspension.  Attorney Cummings admitted the assertions in 
the ARDC's petition and consented to the imposition of a six-
month suspension.  The Supreme Court of Illinois ultimately 
imposed the requested six-month suspension. 
¶10 Supreme Court Rule 22.22(3) provides that this court 
"shall impose the identical discipline or license suspension" 
unless one or more of the three listed exceptions apply. 
Attorney Cummings has not filed any response to the OLR's 
complaint or to this court's order, alleging that any exception 
applies.  Our own review of the matter leads us to conclude that 
none apply.  Accordingly, we conclude that the imposition of a 
six-month suspension of Attorney Cummings' license to practice 
law in Wisconsin, as reciprocal discipline, is warranted. 
¶11 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Michael Leslie 
Cummings to practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period 
of six months, effective the date of this order.   
¶12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Michael Leslie Cummings 
shall comply with the provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the 
No. 
2017AP1255-D   
 
6 
 
duties of a person whose license to practice law in Wisconsin 
has been suspended. 
¶13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that compliance with all 
conditions of this order is required for reinstatement from the 
suspension imposed herein.3 
 
 
                                                 
3 In 
addition 
to 
obtaining 
reinstatement 
from 
the 
disciplinary suspension imposed by this order, before he is able 
to practice law in Wisconsin, Attorney Cummings will also be 
required to complete the procedures for reinstatement from the 
administrative suspension currently in effect for failure to pay 
applicable bar dues and supreme court assessments. 
No. 
2017AP1255-D   
 
 
 
1