Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Peter James Nickitas

State: wisconsin

Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Document:

2023 WI 78 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2023AP1294-D 
 
 
 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Peter James Nickitas, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
Peter James Nickitas, 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST NICKITAS  
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
December 15, 2023   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
Per curiam.  
  
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
      
 
 
 
 
2023 WI 78
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.  2023AP1294-D 
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Peter James Nickitas, Attorney at Law: 
 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Peter James Nickitas, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
DEC 15, 2023 
 
Samuel A. Christensen 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY 
disciplinary 
proceeding.   Attorney's 
license 
suspended.   
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM. This is a reciprocal discipline matter.  
On July 21, 2023, the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) filed a 
complaint and motion, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 
22.22, asking this court to suspend Attorney Peter James 
Nickitas's license to practice law in Wisconsin for a period of 
120 days, as discipline reciprocal to that imposed by the 
Supreme Court of Minnesota.  
No. 
2023AP1294-D   
 
2 
 
¶2 
On September 19, 2023, in response to OLR's motion, 
this court issued an order directing Attorney Nickitas to show 
cause, in writing, within twenty days, why the imposition of 
discipline reciprocal to that imposed in Minnesota would be 
unwarranted.  On October 3, 2023, Attorney Nickitas filed a 
response to this court's motion.  Attorney Nickitas does not 
object to the imposition of reciprocal discipline, but he 
requests that the 120-day suspension be applied retroactively so 
as to run coterminous with the term of his Minnesota suspension.  
On October 11, 2023, OLR filed a response opposing a retroactive 
suspension.  Upon review of the matter, we decline to make the 
120-day suspension retroactive. 
¶3 
Attorney Nickitas was admitted to practice law in 
Wisconsin in 1991.  He is also admitted to practice law in 
Minnesota.  His most recent address on file with the State Bar 
of Wisconsin is in Saint Paul, Minnesota.  
¶4 
Attorney Nickitas's professional disciplinary history 
in Wisconsin consists of a 90-day suspension imposed in 2006, 
reciprocal to a suspension in Minnesota, see In re Disciplinary 
Proceedings Against Nickitas, 2006 WI 20, 289 Wis. 2d 18, 710 
N.W.2d 464, and a 30-day suspension imposed in 2014, also 
reciprocal to a suspension in Minnesota.  See In re Disciplinary 
Proceedings Against Nickitas, 2014 WI 12, 352 Wis. 2d 641, 843 
N.W.2d 438. 
¶5 
On January 11, 2023, the Supreme Court of Minnesota 
suspended Attorney Nickitas's Minnesota law license for 120 days 
for 
using 
profane, 
abusive, 
and 
obscene 
language 
while 
No. 
2023AP1294-D   
 
3 
 
communicating with court staff, making false and disparaging 
comments about a judge, and attempting to exert improper 
influence on a judge.  Attorney Nickitas timely notified OLR of 
the Minnesota suspension. 
¶6 
Supreme Court Rule 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"; "[t]here was such an infirmity of 
proof establishing the misconduct . . . that the supreme court 
could not accept as final the conclusion in respect to the 
misconduct . . ."; or "[t]he misconduct justifies substantially 
different discipline in this state." 
¶7 
Attorney Nickitas has not claimed that any of these 
three exceptions exist and, as noted, he does not oppose the 
imposition of reciprocal discipline.  His only argument is that 
the 120-day suspension in Wisconsin should be made retroactive 
to the term of the Minnesota suspension because he says he was 
not practicing law in Wisconsin during that time. 
¶8 
In opposing the request for a retroactive suspension, 
OLR notes that Attorney Nickitas made an identical request when 
reciprocal discipline was last imposed in 2014.  OLR says that 
Attorney 
Nickitas's 
purported 
voluntary 
cessation 
of 
the 
practice of law in Wisconsin during the term of his Minnesota 
suspension does not warrant retroactive application of the 
suspension imposed by this court.  As in 2014, we agree with 
OLR's 
reasoning. 
 
Suspensions 
are 
generally 
not 
imposed 
No. 
2023AP1294-D   
 
4 
 
retroactively, and there are no special circumstances present in 
this case that would warrant a retroactive suspension. 
¶9 
IT IS ORDERED that the license of Peter James Nickitas 
to practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period of 120 
days, effective January 19, 2024. 
¶10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Peter James Nickitas shall 
comply with the provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of 
a person whose license to practice law in Wisconsin has been 
suspended. 
¶11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that compliance with all 
conditions of this order is required for reinstatement.  See SCR 
22.28(2). 
 
 
No. 
2023AP1294-D   
 
 
 
1