Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Charles James Holley

State: wisconsin

Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Document:

2007 WI 34 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2006AP2519-D 
 
 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings  
Against Charles James Holley, Attorney at Law: 
 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
Charles James Holley, 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HOLLEY 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
March 21, 2007   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
        
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:         
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
      
 
 
2007 WI 34
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.  2006AP2519-D  
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings  
Against Charles James Holley, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Charles James Holley, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
MAR 21, 2007 
 
A. John Voelker 
Acting Clerk of Supreme 
Court 
 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY 
disciplinary 
proceeding.   
Attorney's 
license 
suspended.   
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.   The Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) 
has filed a complaint and motion pursuant to SCR 22.22 
requesting that this court impose reciprocal discipline against 
Attorney Charles James Holley identical to the 60-day suspension 
imposed by the Supreme Court of Illinois.  The OLR's complaint 
further alleges that Attorney Holley failed to notify the OLR of 
the suspension of his license to practice law in Illinois within 
No. 
2006AP2519-D   
 
2 
 
20 days of the effective date of the order, contrary to SCR 
22.22(1).1 
¶2 
On October 17, 2006, this court issued an order to 
show cause directing Attorney Holley to show cause in writing by 
November 6, 2006, why the imposition of the identical discipline 
imposed by the Supreme Court of Illinois would be unwarranted.  
Attorney Holley failed to respond to either the OLR's complaint 
or the order to show cause. 
¶3 
Attorney Holley was licensed to practice law in 
Illinois and Wisconsin in 1991.  Since his admission to the 
practice of law, Attorney Holley has practiced in Illinois, 
apparently either as an associate in law firms or as a solo 
practitioner.  His license to practice law in Wisconsin is 
currently suspended for failure to comply with his continuing 
legal education requirements and for failure to pay his state 
bar dues. 
¶4 
On January 13, 2006, the Supreme Court of Illinois 
approved the report and recommendation of the Hearing Board of 
the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission 
(the Hearing Board) and suspended Attorney Holley's license to 
                                                 
1 SCR 22.22(1) provides:  Reciprocal discipline. 
 
(1) 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 order or judgment of the other 
jurisdiction constitutes misconduct. 
No. 
2006AP2519-D   
 
3 
 
practice law in Illinois for a period of 60 days, effective 
February 3, 2006.  The Hearing Board determined that, with 
respect to three separate client matters between January 2002 
and July 2002, Attorney Holley had failed to keep funds 
belonging to clients or third parties separate from his own 
funds and that he had unintentionally converted approximately 
$10,000 of those funds by using them for his own business 
expenses, in violation of Rule 1.15(a) of the Illinois Rules of 
Professional Conduct.2  The Hearing Board accepted Attorney 
Holley's claim that his temporary use of the client funds was 
due to his failure to segregate the funds and to keep track of 
the balance in his business account into which he had deposited 
the funds.  The Hearing Board also found that Attorney Holley 
had failed to deliver promptly funds to a client that the client 
was entitled to receive, in violation of Rule 1.15(b) of the 
Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct.  Attorney Holley's 
conduct was also found to have been prejudicial to the 
administration of justice, in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(4) of the 
Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct, and to have tended to 
defeat the administration of justice or to bring the legal 
profession into disrepute, contrary to Illinois Supreme Court 
Rule 770. 
                                                 
2 Although Attorney Holley did temporarily use client funds 
for his own expenses when the balance in his business account 
fell below the amount of the funds held in trust, he did 
subsequently return the funds to the proper parties. 
No. 
2006AP2519-D   
 
4 
 
¶5 
SCR 22.22(3) provides that this court "shall impose 
the identical discipline or license suspension unless . . . 
[t]he procedure in the other jurisdiction was so lacking in 
notice or opportunity to be heard as to constitute a deprivation 
of due process" violation; "[t]here was such an infirmity of 
proof establishing the misconduct . . . that [this court] could 
not accept as final" the other jurisdiction's misconduct 
finding; or "[t]he misconduct justifies substantially different 
discipline" here.  Attorney Holley, who was represented by 
counsel in the Illinois disciplinary proceeding, has not alleged 
that any of these three exceptions exist.  Accordingly, the 
imposition of reciprocal discipline against Attorney Holley is 
warranted. 
¶6 
The OLR has filed a statement of costs, which 
indicates that the total costs of this proceeding, as of 
February 15, 2007, were $143.  Attorney Holley has not objected 
to the OLR's statement of costs.  We conclude that Attorney 
Holley should be required to pay the costs of this proceeding. 
¶7 
IT IS ORDERED that the license of Charles James Holley 
to practice law in the State of Wisconsin is suspended for a 
period of 60 days, effective May 1, 2007. 
¶8 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date 
of this order, Attorney Holley shall 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 those costs within that time, the 
No. 
2006AP2519-D   
 
5 
 
license of Attorney Holley to practice law in Wisconsin shall 
remain suspended until further order of this court. 
¶9 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Attorney Holley comply with 
the provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of a person 
whose license to practice law in Wisconsin has been suspended. 
 
No. 
2006AP2519-D   
 
 
 
1