Case Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Lee Erlandson

Citation: 2005 WI 143

Docket Number: 2004AP002623-D

State: wisconsin

Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Date: 2005-10-19T00:00:00Z

Document:
2005 WI 143 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2004AP2623-D 
 
 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Lee Erlandson, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
Lee Erlandson, 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ERLANDSON 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
October 19, 2005   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
        
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:         
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
      
 
 
2005 WI 143
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
NOTICE 
This order is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The 
final version will appear in the 
bound volume of the official 
reports.   
 
 
 
No.  2004AP2623-D  
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Lee Erlandson, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Lee Erlandson, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
FILED 
 
OCT 19, 2005 
 
Cornelia G. Clark 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
Madison, WI 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The Court entered the following order on this date: 
 
Attorney Lee Erlandson has filed a petition for consensual 
license revocation under SCR 22.19.  Attorney Erlandson’s 
Wisconsin law license was suspended on June 5, 2001 after this 
court found that it appeared his continued practice of law posed 
a threat to the interests of the public and the administration 
of justice.1   
                                                 
1 
In 
August 
2000, 
the 
Board 
of 
Attorneys 
Professional 
Responsibility (BAPR), the predecessor to the Office of Lawyer 
Regulation (OLR), filed a medical incapacity proceeding seeking 
the imposition of conditions on Attorney Erlandson’s license to 
practice law.  Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, this court 
determined that Attorney Erlandson was medically incapacitated 
as a result of his alcoholism.  The court initially imposed 
certain conditions requested by BAPR on Attorney Erlandson’s 
No.  2004AP2623-D 
 
2 
 
Attorney Erlandson is currently the subject of a pending 
disciplinary action in which the OLR filed a complaint in 
October 2004 alleging 10 counts of misconduct involving four 
clients.  Three counts of misconduct relate to Attorney 
Erlandson’s representation of Paula W.  Those counts include 
conversion 
which 
involves 
dishonesty, 
fraud, 
deceit 
and 
misrepresentation and creating and filing false and fraudulent 
annual guardianship accounts in violation of SCR 20:8.4(c)2 and 
SCR 20:3.3(a)1.3  One count of misconduct relates to Attorney 
Erlandson’s representation of Roy C.  That count relates to a 
false billing statement involving dishonesty, contrary to SCR 
20:8.4(c). 
 
Four 
counts 
involved 
Attorney 
Erlandson’s 
representation of Donald H.  Those counts include conversion, 
creating and attesting to a fraudulent guardianship report, 
filing a false annual guardianship report, and making false 
statements to the OLR, in violation of SCR 20:8.4(c), SCR 
20:3.3(a) and SCR 22.03(6).4  Two counts involved Attorney 
Erlandson’s representation of Steve K.  Those counts included 
                                                                                                                                                             
license to practice law.  OLR subsequently filed a report saying 
Attorney Erlandson had failed to comply with those conditions.  
Based on that failure, this court temporarily suspended his 
license.   
 
2 SCR 20:8.4(c) provides:  Misconduct  
 
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:  
 
... 
  
(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit 
or misrepresentation;  
 
3 SCR 20:3.3(a)(1) provides:  Candor toward the tribunal  
 
(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:  
(1) make a false statement of fact or law to a 
tribunal.  
4 SCR 22.03(6) provides:  Investigation. 
 
 
(6)  In the course of the investigation, the respondent's 
wilful failure to provide relevant information, to answer 
questions fully, or to furnish documents and the respondent's 
misrepresentation in a disclosure are misconduct, regardless of 
the merits of the matters asserted in the grievance. 
 
 
No.  2004AP2623-D 
 
3 
leaving the state without surrendering the client’s file and 
without allowing the client adequate time to employ new counsel, 
failure to refund unearned fees, improperly terminating his 
representation, and failing to act diligently in the matter, in 
violation of 20:1.16(d)5 and SCR 20:1.3.6  Attorney Stanley F. 
Hack was appointed referee in that disciplinary matter. 
 
The OLR has informed the court that the guardian of Paula 
W. applied for and received reimbursement from the State Bar’s 
Wisconsin Lawyer’s Fund for Client Protection (Fund) in the 
amount of $7300; that Donald H. applied for and received 
reimbursement from the Fund in the amount of $1304.95; and that 
Steve K. applied for and received reimbursement from the Fund in 
the amount of $1888.  The OLR recommends that Attorney Erlandson 
be required to make restitution to the Fund in those amounts. 
 
In March 2005, Attorney Erlandson was convicted of two 
Class H felonies, operating while under the influence of 
intoxicants and felony bailjumping.  Attorney Erlandson is also 
currently the subject of an OLR investigation relating to his 
two felony convictions.  In his petition, Attorney Erlandson 
submits under SCR 22.19(2) that he cannot successfully defend 
against 
the 
allegations 
of 
the 
OLR 
complaint 
or 
the 
investigation relating to the felony convictions.  Referee Hack 
has filed a report recommending that Attorney Erlandson’s 
license to practice law in Wisconsin be consensually revoked.  
                                                 
5 
SCR 
20:1.16(d) 
provides: 
 
Declining 
or 
terminating 
representation 
 
... 
 
(d) 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 payment of fee that has 
not been earned. The lawyer may retain papers relating to 
the client to the extent permitted by other law.  
 
6 SCR 20:1.3 provides:  Diligence  
A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness 
in representing a client.  
 
No.  2004AP2623-D 
 
4 
The 
OLR 
also 
supports 
Attorney 
Erlandson’s 
petition 
for 
consensual license revocation.   
 
IT IS ORDERED that the petition for consensual license 
revocation is granted. 
 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the license of Lee Erlandson to 
practice law in Wisconsin is revoked effective the date of this 
order.   
 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Lee Erlandson shall comply with 
the requirements of SCR 22.26 relating to activities following 
revocation.   
 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Lee Erlandson make restitution 
to the Fund in the amounts set forth above.   
 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Lee Erlandson shall pay the 
costs of this proceeding.   
 
 
 
 
No.  2004AP2623-D 
 
5