Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Robert L. Taylor

State: wisconsin

Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Document:

2006 WI 112 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2003AP587-D 
 
 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Robert L. Taylor, Attorney at Law: 
 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant-Respondent, 
     v. 
Robert L. Taylor, 
          Respondent-Appellant. 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST TAYLOR 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
September 1, 2006   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
November 16, 2005   
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
        
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:         
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
For the respondent-appellant there was a brief by Robert L. 
Taylor, Milwaukee. 
 
For the complainant-respondent there was a brief by Julie 
M. Falk, assistant litigation counsel. 
 
 
2006 WI 112
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.  2003AP587-D  
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Robert L. Taylor, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant-Respondent, 
 
     v. 
 
Robert L. Taylor, 
 
          Respondent-Appellant. 
 
FILED 
 
SEP 1, 2006 
 
Cornelia G. Clark 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY reinstatement proceeding.  Reinstatement granted 
upon conditions.   
 
¶1 
PER 
CURIAM.   We 
review 
a 
referee's 
supplemental 
report recommending that Robert L. Taylor's license to practice 
law in Wisconsin be reinstated.   
¶2 
We 
adopt 
the 
referee's 
findings 
of 
fact 
and 
conclusions of law and conclude that Attorney Taylor's license 
to practice law should be reinstated upon the conditions 
recommended by the referee.  We further direct Attorney Taylor 
No. 
2003AP587-D   
 
2 
 
to pay the costs of the reinstatement proceedings, which total 
$5686.69 as of April 7, 2006.   
¶3 
Attorney Taylor was licensed to practice law in 
Wisconsin in 1979 and practiced in Milwaukee.  His license was 
summarily suspended on July 28, 1986, following his conviction 
for felony theft of client funds.  On March 17, 1989, his 
license to practice law was revoked, effective December 14, 
1987, the date on which Attorney Taylor's felony conviction 
became final, as a result of the felony theft of client funds 
and related misconduct.  See In re Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Taylor, 148 Wis. 2d 708, 436 N.W.2d 612 (1989).  
Attorney Taylor was directed to make restitution to one client 
in the amount of $2856.06, plus interest.  He was also directed 
to pay the costs of the disciplinary proceeding.  
¶4 
In 
2003 
Attorney 
Taylor 
filed 
a 
petition 
for 
consensual license revocation under SCR 22.19(3)1 stemming from a 
further investigation by the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) 
into additional charges of misconduct.  The four matters 
involved in that investigation involved pre-revocation conduct 
                                                 
1 SCR 22.19(3) states:  Petition for consensual license 
revocation. 
 
(3) If a complaint has not been filed, the 
petition shall be filed in the supreme court and shall 
include the director's summary of the misconduct 
allegations being investigated.  Within 20 days after 
the date of filing of the petition, the director shall 
file in the supreme court a recommendation on the 
petition.  Upon a showing of good cause, the supreme 
court may extend the time for filing a recommendation. 
No. 
2003AP587-D   
 
3 
 
dating from around 1987.  One of the matters involved Attorney 
Taylor's 1990 federal criminal conviction for conspiracy to 
defraud by misapplying funds and embezzlement from a federal 
credit union.  The other three matters involved Attorney 
Taylor's representation of three clients during a 1985 period 
during which his license was suspended for failure to comply 
with continuing legal education (CLE) requirements.  The 
consensual revocation was made retroactive to December 14, 1992, 
the date on which Attorney Taylor could have first sought 
reinstatement from his 1987 revocation.  See In re Disciplinary 
Proceedings Against Taylor, 2003 WI 35, 261 Wis. 2d 1, 660 
N.W.2d 665. 
¶5 
On October 22, 2003, Attorney Taylor filed a petition 
for reinstatement.  James Winiarski was appointed referee.  On 
August 25, 2004, the referee filed a report and recommendation 
recommending that Attorney Taylor's reinstatement petition be 
denied 
because 
Attorney 
Taylor 
had 
not 
shown 
by 
clear, 
satisfactory, and convincing evidence that he had met a number 
of the criteria necessary to warrant his reinstatement.   
¶6 
On December 28, 2005, this court remanded the matter 
to the referee for further proceedings relating to the questions 
whether Attorney Taylor has the moral character to practice law 
and whether he can safely 
be recommended 
to 
the 
legal 
profession, the courts, and the public as a person fit to be 
consulted by others and to represent them and otherwise act in 
matters of trust and confidence.  Following the remand, Attorney 
Taylor and the OLR filed supplemental briefs.  On March 16, 
No. 
2003AP587-D   
 
4 
 
2006, 
the 
referee 
issued 
a 
supplemental 
report 
and 
recommendation recommending that Attorney Taylor's petition for 
reinstatement be granted.   
¶7 
In his supplemental report, the referee noted that 
Attorney Taylor submitted character reference letters from 
individuals who have known him in the past and who presently 
know him.  The referee said while some of the writers did not 
address Attorney Taylor's current moral character as it relates 
to the practice of law, there was evidence that Attorney Taylor 
does again possess the moral character to practice law and that 
he can now be safely recommended to the legal profession, the 
courts, and the public as a person fit to be consulted by others 
and to represent them and otherwise act in matters of trust and 
confidence.   
¶8 
The referee noted that the OLR continues to object to 
Attorney Taylor's reinstatement citing, among other things, the 
fact that he has been slow in making restitution and paying the 
costs of the prior disciplinary proceedings.  The referee said 
he did not believe the nonpayment of restitution and costs 
should prohibit Attorney Taylor's reinstatement since it does 
not appear that he has had the financial ability to completely 
pay all restitution and costs, given the fact that he has raised 
four children and has had limited employment opportunities for a 
substantial part of the last 20 years.  In making his 
recommendation to grant the reinstatement petition, the referee 
said: 
No. 
2003AP587-D   
 
5 
 
 
While 
the 
evidence 
in 
support 
of 
Taylor's 
petition for reinstatement is not overwhelming, I am 
satisfied 
by 
clear, 
satisfactory, 
and 
convincing 
evidence that he should be reinstated at this time.  
Based upon the comments of individuals who know him 
best, there is evidence that Taylor has changed his 
life and has become a hard-working honest individual.  
He has chosen to give back to the community in the 
form of volunteer services, which he continues to 
render.  I also note that there is no evidence of 
dishonesty, poor character, criminal activities or 
other harmful conduct since the time of Taylor's 
original misconduct which resulted in the loss of his 
license to practice law some twenty years ago.  In 
making 
this 
recommendation, 
I 
place 
considerable 
weight on the fact that there is no current evidence 
of poor moral character. 
¶9 
The referee said in the event this court does 
reinstate Attorney Taylor's license, he recommends the following 
conditions should be placed on the reinstatement:  (1) Attorney 
Taylor must produce a current favorable recommendation from the 
Board of Bar Examiners (BBE); (2) reinstatement should be 
conditioned upon Attorney Taylor paying a minimum of $200 per 
month toward restitution and costs, beginning six months after 
he is reinstated; and (3) within 30 days of reinstatement 
Attorney Taylor must provide proof that he has established a 
client trust account.  The referee further noted that although 
it may be impossible to order, he would strongly encourage 
Attorney Taylor to practice law with or have close associations 
and communications with other practicing lawyers.   
¶10 On March 21, 2006, the BBE recommended Attorney 
Taylor's reinstatement to the practice of law in Wisconsin, 
subject to his compliance with current CLE requirements. 
No. 
2003AP587-D   
 
6 
 
¶11 The standard to be met for reinstatement of a law 
license is provided in SCR 22.31(1).2  The petitioner has the 
burden of demonstrating "by clear, satisfactory, and convincing 
evidence" that the lawyer has the moral character to practice 
law, that the lawyer's resumption of the practice of law will 
not 
be 
detrimental 
to 
the 
administration 
of 
justice 
or 
subversive of the public interest, and that the lawyer has 
complied with SCR 22.26 and the terms of the suspension.  In 
addition, SCR 22.29(4) sets forth related requirements that a 
petition for reinstatement must show.  All of these additional 
requirements are effectively incorporated into SCR 22.31(1).   
¶12 After careful review of the record we agree with the 
referee 
that 
Attorney 
Taylor 
has 
established 
by 
clear, 
                                                 
2 SCR 22.31(1) provides:  Reinstatement hearing. 
 
(1) 
The 
petitioner 
has 
the 
burden 
of 
demonstrating, by clear, satisfactory, and convincing 
evidence, all of the following: 
 
 
(a) That he or she has the moral character 
to practice law in Wisconsin. 
 
 
(b) That his or her resumption of the 
practice of law will not be detrimental to the 
administration of justice or subversive of the public 
interest. 
 
 
(c) That his or her representations in the 
petition, including the representations required by 
SCR 
22.29(4)(a) 
to 
(m) 
and 
22.29(5), 
are 
substantiated. 
 
 
(d) That he or she has complied fully with 
the terms of the order of suspension or revocation and 
with the requirements of SCR 22.26. 
No. 
2003AP587-D   
 
7 
 
satisfactory, and convincing evidence that he has satisfied all 
the criteria necessary for reinstatement.  Accordingly, we adopt 
the referee's findings of fact and conclusions of law and we 
accept the referee's recommendation 
to 
reinstate Attorney 
Taylor's license to practice law in Wisconsin, subject to the 
conditions recommended by the referee.  We also echo the 
referee's comment that Attorney Taylor is strongly encouraged to 
either 
practice 
with 
or 
have 
close 
associations 
and 
communications with other practicing lawyers.  We further direct 
Attorney 
Taylor 
to 
pay 
the 
costs 
of 
the 
reinstatement 
proceedings. 
¶13 IT IS ORDERED that the petition for reinstatement of 
the license of Robert L. Taylor to practice law in Wisconsin is 
granted, effective the date of this order. 
¶14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the reinstatement of 
Attorney Taylor's license to practice law be subject to the 
following conditions:  (1) that he comply with current CLE 
requirements; (2) that he pay a minimum of $200 per month toward 
restitution and costs, including the costs of the reinstatement 
proceedings, beginning six months after he is reinstated; and 
(3) within 30 days of reinstatement Attorney Taylor must provide 
proof that he has established a client trust account. 
¶15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the minimum of $200 per 
month that Attorney Taylor is required to begin paying six 
months after he is reinstated shall first be applied to 
restitution and, after restitution has been paid in full, the 
monthly payments shall be applied to costs.  If Attorney Taylor 
No. 
2003AP587-D   
 
8 
 
fails to make the monthly payments required by this order, and 
absent a showing to this court of his inability to pay, the 
license of Robert L. Taylor to practice law in Wisconsin shall 
be suspended until further order of the court. 
No. 
2003AP587-D   
 
 
 
1