Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Mary K. Arthur

State: wisconsin

Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Document:

2006 WI 127 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2006AP831-D 
 
 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Mary K. Arthur, Attorney at Law: 
 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
Mary K. Arthur, 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ARTHUR 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
November 17, 2006   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
        
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING: ROGGENSACK, J., did not participate.   
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
      
 
 
2006 WI 127
 
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.  2006AP831-D  
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Mary K. Arthur, Attorney at Law: 
 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Mary K. Arthur, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
NOV 17, 2006 
 
Cornelia G. Clark 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
Madison, WI 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The Court entered the following order on this date: 
 
Attorney Mary K. Arthur has filed a petition for consensual 
license revocation under SCR 22.19.  On March 17, 2006, Attorney 
Arthur’s license to practice law in this state was summarily 
suspended due to her criminal convictions in federal district 
court for conspiracy to commit bankruptcy fraud and conspiracy 
to commit money laundering.   
 
The Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) filed a complaint and 
an amended complaint against Attorney Mary K. Arthur seeking the 
revocation of her license to practice law in Wisconsin.  No 
referee has been appointed in this matter and, without objection 
by 
Attorney 
Arthur, 
her 
petition 
for 
consensual 
license 
revocation has been submitted directly to this court for its 
consideration.   
 
No.  2006AP831-D 
 
2 
According 
to 
the 
OLR’s 
complaint 
and 
the 
materials 
submitted 
in 
support 
of 
Attorney 
Arthur’s 
petition 
for 
consensual license revocation, following a bench trial in the 
United States District Court for the Eastern District of 
Wisconsin, Attorney Arthur was found guilty on November 7, 2005, 
of nine counts of conspiracy to commit bankruptcy fraud and 
conspiracy to commit money laundering.  In brief, the federal 
district court’s written decision found that Attorney Mary 
Arthur had conspired to conceal her husband’s (Ronald A. Arthur) 
individual and marital interests in real property, automobiles, 
investments, accounts receivable, and ongoing consulting work 
from the federal bankruptcy trustee in order for Ronald Arthur 
to obtain a total discharge of all debts in his bankruptcy 
proceedings, contrary to 18 U.S.C. § 371, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 & 
152(5), 
and 
18 
U.S.C. 
§§ 1956(h), 
1956(a)(1)(A)(i) 
and 
1956(a)(2)(B)(i).  As of the date of this order, Attorney Arthur 
has not yet been sentenced for these offenses. 
 
Pursuant to SCR 22.19(4), the director of the OLR has 
submitted a response supporting the petition for consensual 
license revocation.  The OLR has also submitted a summary of the 
misconduct allegations that it is investigating and pursuing 
against Attorney Arthur.  The OLR’s summary, which is attached 
as an appendix to Attorney Arthur’s petition, states that 
Attorney Arthur’s criminal convictions constitute a violation of 
SCR 20:8.4(b), which states that it is professional misconduct 
for a lawyer to “commit a criminal act that reflects adversely 
on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer 
in other respects.”   
 
Attorney 
Arthur’s 
petition 
for 
consensual 
license 
revocation states that she cannot successfully defend against 
the allegations of professional misconduct that are set forth in 
the OLR’s summary and its amended complaint.  Attorney Arthur 
further states that she is filing the petition for consensual 
license revocation freely, voluntarily and knowingly.  Attorney 
Arthur also acknowledges that she is giving up various rights by 
filing the petition for consensual license revocation, including 
the right to a public hearing and to contest each allegation of 
misconduct alleged by the OLR.  Finally, Attorney Arthur 
acknowledges that she has been given the opportunity to consult 
with counsel concerning this matter, but has declined to do so. 
 
Upon consideration of this matter, the court accepts 
Attorney Arthur’s admission that she cannot successfully defend 
against the allegations of professional misconduct set forth in 
the OLR’s summary and its complaint. 
No.  2006AP831-D 
 
3 
 
IT IS ORDERED that the petition for consensual license 
revocation is granted. 
 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the license of Mary K. Arthur to 
practice law in Wisconsin is revoked effective the date of this 
order. 
 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Mary K. Arthur shall comply with 
the requirements of SCR 22.26 relating to activities following 
revocation. 
 
Roggensack, J., did not participate. 
 
 
 
No.  2006AP831-D 
 
4