Case Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Matthew S. MacLean

Citation: 

Docket Number: 2015AP001433-D

State: wisconsin

Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Date: 2016-06-03T00:00:00Z

Document:
2016 WI 45 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2015AP1433-D 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Matthew S. MacLean, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
Matthew S. MacLean, 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST MACLEAN 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
June 3, 2016 
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
      
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
      
 
COUNTY: 
      
 
JUDGE: 
      
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
      
 
DISSENTED: 
      
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:          
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2016 WI 45
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.   2015AP1433-D 
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings  
Against Matthew S. MacLean, Attorney at Law: 
 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Matthew S. MacLean, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
 
FILED 
 
JUN 3, 2016 
 
Diane M. Fremgen 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding.    Attorney's license 
suspended.   
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.   We review the report and recommendation 
of Referee Richard C. Ninneman that the license of Attorney 
Matthew S. MacLean be suspended for two years for professional 
misconduct and that Attorney MacLean pay the full costs of this 
proceeding, which are $3,573.11 as of January 28, 2016.  The 
referee 
also 
recommends 
that, 
during 
the 
period 
of 
his 
suspension, Attorney MacLean continue participation in the 
No. 
2015AP1433-D   
 
2 
 
Wisconsin 
Lawyers 
Assistance 
Program 
(WisLAP) 
monitoring 
program.  
¶2 
After careful review of this matter, we adopt the 
referee's findings of fact and conclusions of law.  We agree 
with the referee that a two-year suspension of Attorney 
MacLean's license is an appropriate sanction for his misconduct. 
We further agree that the full costs of the proceeding should be 
assessed against the attorney, and we also agree that Attorney 
MacLean should be required to continue participation in the 
WisLAP monitoring program during the term of his suspension.  
¶3 
Attorney MacLean was admitted to practice law in 
Wisconsin in 1998.  He has no prior disciplinary history.  He is 
not currently practicing law and the State Bar of Wisconsin 
lists his license status as "inactive."   
¶4 
On July 17, 2015, the Office of Lawyer Regulation 
(OLR) filed a complaint alleging that Attorney MacLean committed 
four counts of misconduct.  The complaint alleged that between 
June 1999 and March 2006, Attorney MacLean was employed by the 
law firm of Michael, Best & Friedrich, LLP, first as an 
associate and later as a contract partner.  In 2006, Attorney 
MacLean became the general counsel and chief compliance officer 
for the investment firm Red Granite Advisors, LLC (Red Granite).  
In late 2011, Red Granite was acquired by Ziegler Lotsoff 
Capital Management, LLC (Ziegler).  Red Granite continued as the 
wholly owned subsidiary of Ziegler.  During Attorney MacLean's 
employment with Red Granite, he had access to and maintained the 
accounts payable records for the company. 
No. 
2015AP1433-D   
 
3 
 
¶5 
The complaint alleged that between March 2006 and 
December 2014, Michael, Best & Friedrich sublet office space and 
several parking spaces at its Milwaukee location to Red Granite 
pursuant to a written sublease agreement.  The complaint further 
alleged that in 2010, BrickStix LLC (BrickStix) was formed to 
commercialize a product designed by Attorney MacLean's minor 
son.  The complaint further alleged that Attorney MacLean 
drafted the Articles of Organization for BrickStix, which listed 
Attorney MacLean, his wife, and another man as the organizing 
members.  
¶6 
In January 2011, Attorney MacLean and his wife opened 
a checking account at Park Bank, titled in the name of 
BrickStix.  Attorney MacLean wrote out substantially all of the 
deposits to and checks from the BrickStix account.  The 
complaint alleged that Attorney MacLean failed to clearly and 
consistently 
keep 
the 
finances 
and 
credit 
card 
accounts 
associated with businesses in which he was involved separate and 
distinct from other businesses and from his and his family's 
personal finances.  
¶7 
The OLR's complaint further alleged that between March 
2006 and September 2013, Attorney MacLean misappropriated more 
than $450,000 belonging to Red Granite and/or Ziegler.  The 
complaint 
alleged 
that 
to 
facilitate 
and/or 
hide 
his 
misappropriation of funds from Red Granite and/or Ziegler, 
Attorney MacLean obtained a lock box and caused payments due 
from Red Granite and/or Ziegler to Michael, Best & Friedrich to 
be directed to the lock box, and he created and caused 
No. 
2015AP1433-D   
 
4 
 
fraudulent invoices purporting to be from Michael, Best & 
Friedrich to be presented to Red Granite and Ziegler.  The 
complaint alleged that Attorney MacLean caused checks to be 
issued by Red Granite or Ziegler payable to Attorney MacLean, 
BrickStix, or third parties, but falsely identified the checks 
in Red Granite's and Ziegler's accounts payable records as being 
payable to a legitimate vendor, including Michael, Best & 
Friedrich.  
¶8 
The complaint alleged that Attorney MacLean caused 
BrickStix to use more than $5,000 of misappropriated funds to 
pay BrickStix's expenses.  In the summer of 2012, Attorney 
MacLean approached Ziegler's chief operating officer, S.R., 
about S.R. purchasing a membership interest in BrickStix, 
because BrickStix required additional capital, including funds 
for production and patent expenses.  Between July 2012 and March 
2013, in furtherance of inducing S.R. to purchase a membership 
interest in BrickStix, Attorney MacLean provided S.R. with 
inaccurate 
and 
misleading 
information 
about 
BrickStix's 
financial condition.  Relying on the misleading and inaccurate 
information, in March 2013 S.R. wired $50,000 into the BrickStix 
account.  The money was intended as the purchase price for an 
LLC of which S.R. was president, to purchase a membership 
interest in BrickStix.  The OLR's complaint alleged that if 
Attorney MacLean had provided accurate information regarding the 
financial condition of BrickStix and Attorney MacLean's actions 
related to the BrickStix account, S.R. would not have pursued 
No. 
2015AP1433-D   
 
5 
 
purchasing an interest in BrickStix and would not have caused 
the LLC to do so.  
¶9 
The complaint alleged that Attorney MacLean, without 
authorization from the appropriate persons associated with Red 
Granite, opened a bank account at Guaranty Bank in the name of 
Red Granite to help facilitate or hide his misappropriation of 
funds.  Between July 2013 and September 2013, Attorney MacLean 
caused several checks to be issued from the BrickStix account 
payable to Red Granite and then caused the checks to be 
deposited in the dummy account at Guaranty Bank.  Attorney 
MacLean, as the general counsel of BrickStix, did not inform the 
managing member, the board of directors, or any other members 
that he deposited funds he misappropriated from Red Granite 
and/or Ziegler into the BrickStix account.  He also did not 
inform the managing member, board of directors, or any other 
members of BrickStix that he had used the BrickStix account in 
furtherance of his course of conduct to misappropriate funds 
from Red Granite and/or Ziegler, nor did he inform the managing 
member, board of directors, or any other members of BrickStix 
that he used funds he misappropriated from Red Granite for the 
benefit of BrickStix. 
¶10 The OLR's complaint alleged that a company called 
Stifel acquired Ziegler and demanded $458,000 restitution from 
Attorney MacLean.  On or about February 2015, Attorney MacLean 
and others paid Stifel cash and assigned common stock back to 
Stifel in the total amount of $404,750.04.  Attorney MacLean 
withheld over $52,000, claiming entitlement under an April 2014 
No. 
2015AP1433-D   
 
6 
 
severance agreement.  Neither Stifel nor Ziegler was aware of 
Attorney MacLean's misappropriations at the time the severance 
agreement was signed.  
¶11 The OLR's complaint alleged the following counts of 
misconduct: 
COUNT ONE: By (i) engaging in a course of conduct that 
included 
misappropriating 
funds 
belonging 
to 
Red 
Granite and/or Ziegler; and (ii) engaging in a course 
of conduct to hide his misappropriations and related 
wrongful conduct, [Attorney] MacLean violated SCR 
20:8.4(c).1 
COUNT TWO:  By engaging in a course of conduct that 
included using funds misappropriated from Red Granite 
for the benefit of BrickStix, [Attorney] MacLean 
violated SCR 20:8.4(c). 
COUNT THREE:  By engaging in a course of conduct 
intended to induce a third party to purchase an 
interest in BrickStix through the use of misleading 
and 
inaccurate 
information 
regarding 
BrickStix's 
financial 
condition, 
and/or 
the 
omission 
of 
information related to [Attorney] MacLean's deposit of 
funds misappropriated from Red Granite and/or Ziegler 
in the BrickStix Account, [Attorney] MacLean violated 
SCR 20:8.4(c).   
COUNT 
FOUR: 
 
[Attorney] 
MacLean 
acted 
under 
a 
concurrent 
conflict 
of 
interest 
by 
representing 
BrickStix as its General Counsel while at the same 
time engaging in a course of conduct that included:  
(i) failing to keep BrickStix's finances separate from 
his personal finances and the finances of Red Granite, 
thereby causing confusion in the handling of credit 
card accounts and payments from the BrickStix Account; 
(ii) causing funds [Attorney] MacLean misappropriated 
from Red Granite and/or Ziegler to be deposited in the 
                                                 
1 SCR 20:8.4(c) provides:  "It is professional misconduct 
for a lawyer to . . . . engage in conduct involving dishonesty, 
fraud, deceit or misrepresentation." 
No. 
2015AP1433-D   
 
7 
 
BrickStix Account; (iii) using the BrickStix Account 
as 
part 
of 
his 
course 
of 
conduct 
intended 
to 
misappropriate funds from Red Granite and/or Ziegler; 
and/or (iv) using funds misappropriated from Red 
Granite for the benefit of BrickStix, and all without 
notifying the Managing Member, the Board of Directors, 
or the other Members of BrickStix, thereby violating 
SCR 20:1.7(a)(2).2 
¶12 On October 1, 2015, the parties signed a stipulation 
whereby Attorney MacLean entered a plea of no contest to the 
misconduct counts alleged in the complaint.  The parties agreed 
that the facts stated in the complaint could be used as a 
                                                 
2 SCR 20:1.7(a)(2) provides: 
(a) Except as provided in par. (b), a lawyer 
shall not represent a client if the representation 
involves a concurrent conflict of interest.  A 
concurrent conflict of interest exists if . . . . 
(2) 
there 
is 
a 
significant 
risk 
that 
the 
representation 
of 
one 
or 
more 
clients 
will 
be 
materially limited by . . . a personal interest of the 
lawyer. 
(b) Notwithstanding the existence of a concurrent 
conflict of interest under par. (a), a lawyer may 
represent a client if: 
 
(1) the lawyer reasonably believes that the 
lawyer will be able to provide competent and diligent 
representation to each affected client;  
 
(2) the representation is not prohibited by law;  
 
(3) the representation does not involve the 
assertion of a claim by one client against another 
client 
represented 
by 
the 
lawyer 
in 
the 
same 
litigation or other proceeding before a tribunal; and 
 
(4) each affected client gives informed consent, 
confirmed in a writing signed by the client. 
No. 
2015AP1433-D   
 
8 
 
factual basis by the referee to make a determination of 
misconduct.  The parties agreed that Attorney MacLean could make 
arguments and produce mitigating factors and other evidence 
regarding sanctions.   
¶13 As part of the stipulation, Attorney MacLean asserted 
a number of mitigating factors, including that he voluntarily 
withdrew from the practice of law in May 2014, upon reporting 
his conduct to the OLR, and he declined an employment 
opportunity at a law firm to address his situation and to 
prevent the law firm from being associated with his conduct.  
Attorney MacLean averred that he sought assistance from WisLAP, 
which led to his being diagnosed with bipolar disorder.  
According to his treating psychiatrist and treating therapist, 
Attorney MacLean's conduct at issue in this matter is the result 
of his bipolar disorder.  Attorney MacLean says he changed his 
State Bar of Wisconsin membership to inactive status effective 
October 31, 2014.  He says he has cooperated with the 
investigations of his conduct by the OLR and others; he has 
expressed remorse, regret, and concern for the victims of his 
conduct; and he has used family resources to make full 
restitution and also used family funds to repay the aborted 
investment in his company. 
¶14 The hearing before the referee was held on December 
10, 2015.  Attorney MacLean was the only witness to testify.  At 
the hearing, the OLR reduced the requested sanction from 
revocation to a three-year suspension.  Attorney MacLean sought 
a shorter suspension or asked that the suspension commence at 
No. 
2015AP1433-D   
 
9 
 
the time he self-reported his conduct to the OLR and ceased 
practicing law in May 2014.  Based on the parties' stipulation, 
the referee found that the OLR had met its burden of proving by 
clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence that Attorney 
MacLean committed the four counts of misconduct set forth in the 
OLR's 
complaint. 
 
The 
referee 
recommended 
that 
Attorney 
MacLean's license to practice law in Wisconsin be suspended for 
two years, commencing with the date of this court's order.  
¶15 The referee pointed out that Attorney MacLean has not 
practiced law since he self-reported his misconduct in May of 
2014.  The referee noted that following a two-year suspension, 
there will be an additional passage of time during which 
Attorney MacLean will have to petition for reinstatement, have a 
hearing before a referee, and ultimately have this court act on 
the petition.  The referee said when all is said and done, 
Attorney MacLean will probably have been out of the practice of 
law for nearly five years.  The referee said that period of time 
will satisfy the OLR's concerns of impressing Attorney MacLean 
with the seriousness of his misconduct and ensuring that he 
continues to cooperate with WisLAP in the treatment of his 
bipolar disorder.  The referee also recommends that, during the 
period of Attorney MacLean's suspension, he be required to 
continue participation in the WisLAP monitoring program and 
submit periodic reports to the OLR as to his continued 
cooperation with his treatment recommendations.  
¶16 A referee's findings of fact are affirmed unless 
clearly erroneous.  Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo.  
No. 
2015AP1433-D   
 
10 
 
See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Eisenberg, 2004 WI 
14, ¶5, 269 Wis. 2d 43, 675 N.W.2d 747.  The court may impose 
whatever sanction it sees fit, regardless 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.   
¶17 There is no showing that any of the referee's findings 
of fact are clearly erroneous.  Accordingly, we adopt them.  We 
also agree with the referee's conclusions of law that Attorney 
MacLean violated the supreme court rules enumerated above.  
¶18 Upon careful review of the matter, we agree with the 
referee's recommendation for a two-year suspension of Attorney 
MacLean's license to practice law in Wisconsin. Attorney 
MacLean's misconduct was serious and warrants a significant 
penalty.  However, Attorney MacLean did present a number of 
mitigating factors, including the fact that he self-reported his 
conduct to the OLR, he sought assistance from WisLAP and 
voluntarily submitted to WisLAP for monitoring of his treatment 
for 
bipolar 
disorder, 
he 
made 
full 
restitution, 
and 
he 
cooperated with the investigation into his conduct.  The referee 
commented that from the referee's observation at the hearing, 
Attorney MacLean "clearly appeared to be remorseful, regretful 
and concerned for the victims of his misconduct."  In addition, 
Attorney MacLean's lack of previous disciplinary history also 
warrants some consideration.  
¶19 We agree with the referee that a two-year suspension 
is an appropriate sanction and is generally consistent with 
prior 
disciplinary 
decisions. 
 
For 
example, 
in 
In 
re 
No. 
2015AP1433-D   
 
11 
 
Disciplinary 
Proceedings 
Against 
Dahle, 
2015 
WI 
29, 
361 
Wis. 2d 430, 862 N.W.2d 582, an attorney with no previous 
disciplinary history was suspended for two years and six months 
for multiple counts of misconduct, including violations of SCR 
20:8.4(c).  Attorney Dahle was found to have misappropriated 
over $400,000 in client funds.  In addition, in In re 
Disciplinary Proceedings Against Ramthun, 2015 WI 94, 365 
Wis. 2d 7, 869 N.W.2d 775, an attorney was suspended for two 
years and six months for multiple counts of misconduct, 
including four counts of violating SCR 20:8.4(c). Attorney 
Ramthun had no prior disciplinary history other than a brief 
temporary suspension for failure to cooperate with the OLR's 
investigation into two of the matters giving rise to the 
proceeding that resulted in the two-and-a-half-year suspension.     
¶20 Finally, we agree with the referee that, during the 
term of his suspension, Attorney MacLean should be required to 
continue monitoring with WisLAP and should be required to submit 
periodic reports to the OLR showing his continued cooperation 
with his monitoring and treatment recommendations.  We also 
agree that Attorney MacLean should be required to pay the full 
costs of this proceeding.  
¶21 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Matthew S. MacLean 
to practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period of two 
years, effective the date of this order.   
¶22 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that during the period of his 
suspension, Matthew S. MacLean shall continue participation in 
the Wisconsin Lawyers Assistance Program and shall submit 
No. 
2015AP1433-D   
 
12 
 
quarterly reports to the Office of Lawyer Regulation showing his 
continued 
cooperation 
with 
monitoring 
and 
treatment 
recommendations of WisLAP.  
¶23 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date 
of this order, Matthew S. MacLean shall pay to the Office of 
Lawyer Regulation the costs of this proceeding, which are 
$3,573.11.  If the costs are not paid within the time specified, 
and absent a showing to this court of his inability to pay the 
costs within that time, the license of Matthew S. MacLean to 
practice law in Wisconsin shall remain suspended until further 
order of the court.  
¶24 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent he has not 
already done so, Matthew S. MacLean 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.  
¶25 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that compliance with all 
conditions of this order is required for reinstatement.  See SCR 
22.28(3). 
 
 
No. 
2015AP1433-D   
 
 
 
1