Case Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. William J. Gilbert

Citation: 2004 WI 144

Docket Number: 2004AP001285-D

State: wisconsin

Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Date: 2004-11-24T00:00:00Z

Document:
2004 WI 144 
 
 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
04-1285-D 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against William J. Gilbert, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation,  
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
William J. Gilbert,  
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST GILBERT 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
November 24, 2004   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
        
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:         
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
      
 
 
2004 WI 144 
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.    04-1285-D 
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against William J. Gilbert, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
 
 
Complainant, 
 
 
v. 
 
William J. Gilbert   
 
 
Respondent   
FILED 
 
NOV 24, 2004 
 
Cornelia G. Clark 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding.   Attorney's license 
suspended. 
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.   We review the referee's recommendation, 
which was made following a stipulation entered into between the 
Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) and Attorney William J. 
Gilbert, that Attorney Gilbert's license to practice law in 
Wisconsin 
be 
suspended 
for 
six 
months 
for 
professional 
misconduct. The misconduct at issue consisted of entering into 
an unfair and unreasonable business transaction with a client, 
without affording the client the opportunity to seek the advice 
of independent counsel and without obtaining the client's 
No. 
04-1285-D   
 
2 
 
written 
consent 
to 
the 
transaction; 
engaging 
in 
conduct 
involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; upon 
termination of representation of a client, failing to take steps 
to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's 
interests, such as surrendering papers and property to which the 
client is entitled; and failing to fully and fairly disclose to 
the OLR all facts and circumstances pertaining to the alleged 
misconduct within 20 days after being served with a request for 
a response to a grievance. The referee recommended that the six-
month suspension be made retroactive to April 7, 2004, the date 
Attorney Gilbert was eligible to apply for reinstatement of his 
license under an earlier disciplinary proceeding, and the 
referee recommended that Attorney Gilbert be required to make 
restitution to the client and that he be required to pay the 
costs of the proceeding. 
¶2 
We 
determine 
that 
the 
seriousness 
of 
Attorney 
Gilbert's professional misconduct warrants a suspension of his 
license to practice law for six months. We also agree that the 
suspension should be made retroactive to April 7, 2004. We 
further agree that Attorney Gilbert should make restitution to 
the client and pay the costs of the proceeding. 
¶3 
Attorney Gilbert was admitted to practice law in 
Wisconsin in 1971 and practiced in Hudson. On June 12, 2003, 
this court suspended his license after he failed to respond to 
an order to show cause relating to his willful failure to 
respond or cooperate in the OLR's investigation of his conduct. 
The conduct at issue was the same as involved in the instant 
No. 
04-1285-D   
 
3 
 
proceeding. On October 7, 2003, this court suspended Attorney 
Gilbert's license for an additional six months for failing to 
act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a 
client; failing to keep a client reasonably informed about the 
status of a matter; failing to hold property of a client or 
property in which both lawyer and client claim an interest in 
trust separate from a lawyer's own property until there is an 
accounting and severing of their interest; failing to surrender 
papers and property to which the client was entitled upon 
termination of representation; and failing to cooperate with the 
OLR in investigation of grievances. See Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Gilbert, 2003 WI 131, 266 Wis. 2d 5, 669 N.W.2d 725. 
Attorney Gilbert's license remains suspended. 
¶4 
The complaint filed by the OLR in this action alleged 
that in 1997 Attorney Gilbert represented a husband and wife in 
the sale of a parcel of real estate. After the sale Attorney 
Gilbert continued to represent the couple regarding some clean 
up work related to a small parcel of the real estate retained by 
them. 
¶5 
In May 1997 Attorney Gilbert requested that the 
husband loan him $10,500. The loan was documented by a 
promissory note. Attorney Gilbert failed to obtain the client's 
written consent to either the loan transaction or any conflicts 
related to it. Prior to borrowing the money and executing the 
promissory note, Attorney Gilbert failed to offer collateral and 
failed to offer the client the opportunity to seek advice of 
independent counsel. He also failed to fully disclose to the 
No. 
04-1285-D   
 
4 
 
client the extent of Attorney Gilbert's financial difficulties, 
including the fact he was delinquent on his home mortgage 
payments, that a mortgage foreclosure action had been filed 
against him, and that a collection action had been filed against 
him. After making a total of $600 in payments, Attorney Gilbert 
defaulted on the loan. 
¶6 
In December 2000 the clients, now represented by new 
counsel, filed a lawsuit against Attorney Gilbert for his 
default under the promissory note. The clients' new attorney 
requested that all of their file materials be furnished to him. 
Attorney Gilbert failed to respond to several requests from the 
attorney, but in April 2001 he finally delivered the clients' 
file to their new counsel. On January 24, 2002, the clients 
obtained a judgment against Attorney Gilbert in the amount of 
$15,797.37. The clients have received no payments from Attorney 
Gilbert to date.  
¶7 
In January 2003 the OLR staff forwarded correspondence 
to Attorney Gilbert concerning a grievance filed by the clients 
and requested a written response on or before February 5, 2003. 
On February 6, 2003, OLR staff granted Attorney Gilbert an 
extension of time to respond to the grievance, but he failed to 
respond by that date and also failed to respond to two 
additional requests from the OLR. As noted above, on June 12, 
2003, Attorney Gilbert's license was temporarily suspended for 
his failure to cooperate with the OLR's investigation into the 
clients' grievance. 
No. 
04-1285-D   
 
5 
 
¶8 
The OLR's complaint alleged that by borrowing money 
from a client, where the terms were unfair and unreasonable, 
based on Attorney Gilbert's failure to offer collateral and to 
disclose his financial circumstances to the client, where 
Attorney Gilbert failed to offer the client the opportunity to 
seek independent counsel, and where Attorney Gilbert failed to 
obtain the client's written consent, he violated SCR 20:1.8(a)1. 
¶9 
The OLR's complaint also alleged that by borrowing 
money from a client, while failing to disclose the extent of his 
financial difficulties, despite knowing he was an extremely poor 
credit risk, Attorney Gilbert violated SCR 20:8.4(c)2. 
¶10 The OLR's complaint further alleged that by failing to 
promptly forward the clients' files to their new attorney, upon 
                                                 
1 SCR 20:1.8(a) provides: 
 
(a) A lawyer shall not enter into a business 
transaction with a client or knowingly acquire an 
ownership, possessory, security or other pecuniary 
interest adverse to a client unless: 
  
(1) the transaction and terms on which the lawyer 
acquires the interest are fair and reasonable to the 
client and are fully disclosed and transmitted in 
writing to the client in a manner which can be 
reasonably understood by the client;  
 
(2) the client is given a reasonable opportunity 
to seek the advice of independent counsel in the 
transaction; and  
 
(3) the client consents in writing thereto. 
 
2 SCR 20:8.4(c) provides: "It is professional misconduct for 
a lawyer to: (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, 
deceit or misrepresentation." 
 
No. 
04-1285-D   
 
6 
 
termination of his representation, Attorney Gilbert violated SCR 
20:1.16(d)3. 
¶11 Finally, the OLR's complaint alleged that by failing 
to submit a written response to the clients' grievance, Attorney 
Gilbert violated SCR 20:8.4(f)4 and SCR 22.03(2)5. 
¶12 Attorney 
Konrad 
T. 
Tuchscherer was 
appointed as 
referee. On August 6, 2004, Attorney Gilbert and the OLR entered 
                                                 
3 SCR 20:1.16(d) provides:  
 
(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. 
 
4 SCR 20:8.4(f) provides: "It is professional misconduct for 
a lawyer to: (f) violate a statute, supreme court rule, supreme 
court order or supreme court decision regulating the conduct of 
lawyers." 
 
5 SCR 22.03(2) provides: 
 
(2) 
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 a 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. 
No. 
04-1285-D   
 
7 
 
into a stipulation which was subsequently submitted to the 
referee. On August 17, 2004, the referee issued his report in 
which he adopted the recitation of facts set forth in the 
stipulation and concluded that Attorney Gilbert violated the 
Supreme Court Rules discussed above. The referee recommended 
that Attorney Gilbert's license be suspended for six months, 
retroactive to April 7, 2004, the date he was eligible to 
petition for reinstatement of his license pursuant to the 
October 7, 2003 suspension. The referee also recommended that 
Attorney Gilbert be ordered to provide restitution to the 
clients 
in 
the 
amount 
of 
$15,797.37, 
plus 
post-judgment 
interest, and he recommended that Attorney Gilbert be assessed 
all costs of this proceeding.  
¶13 A referee's findings of fact on a disciplinary matter 
will not be set aside unless they are clearly erroneous. In re 
Disciplinary Proceedings Against Sosnay, 209 Wis. 2d 241, 243, 
562 N.W.2d 137 (1997). Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 
In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Carroll, 2000 WI 130, 
¶29, 248 Wis. 2d 662, 636 N.W.2d 718. Since the referee's 
findings of fact have not been shown to be clearly erroneous, we 
adopt them.  
¶14 We also conclude, as did the referee, that the 
seriousness of Attorney 
Gilbert's 
misconduct 
warrants the 
suspension of his license to practice law in Wisconsin for six 
months. We note that the stipulation points out that Attorney 
Gilbert's wife was very ill at the time he failed to respond to 
the OLR's requests for information and that following his wife's 
No. 
04-1285-D   
 
8 
 
surgeries Attorney Gilbert did cooperate with the OLR in this 
matter. We further agree with the referee that it is appropriate 
to make the six-month suspension retroactive to April 7, 2004. 
Finally, we agree with the referee that Attorney Gilbert should 
be required to make restitution to his clients and that he 
should be required to pay the costs of this proceeding.  
¶15 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Attorney William J. 
Gilbert to practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for six 
months, retroactive to April 7, 2004.  
¶16 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Attorney William J. Gilbert 
make restitution to his clients in the amount of $15,797.37, 
plus post-judgment interest.  
¶17 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date 
of this order, Attorney William J. Gilbert pay to the Office of 
Lawyer Regulation the costs of this proceeding. 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 Attorney William J. Gilbert to practice law in 
Wisconsin shall remain suspended until further order of the 
court. 
 
No. 
04-1285-D   
 
 
 
1