Title: Ronald Sylvan v.

State: wisconsin

Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Document:

No. 96-0055-D 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
 
 
 
 
No.  96-0055-D 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN             :                IN SUPREME COURT 
                                                                   
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against RONALD W. SYLVAN, Attorney at Law. 
 
FILED 
 
 
JUN 21, 1996 
 
 
 Marilyn L. Graves 
  Clerk of Supreme Court 
  
Madison, WI  
 
                                                                
   
 
 
 
ATTORNEY 
disciplinary 
proceeding. 
 
Attorney's 
license 
suspended. 
 
PER CURIAM.   We review the recommendation of the referee 
that the license of Ronald W. Sylvan to practice law in Wisconsin 
be 
suspended 
for 
60 
days 
as 
discipline 
for 
professional 
misconduct.  Attorney Sylvan failed to probate an estate timely 
and with reasonable diligence, failed to keep the estate's 
personal representative reasonably informed about the status of 
the probate and reply to his reasonable requests for information, 
charged an excessive and unreasonable fee based on a percentage of 
the estate, contrary to statute, and failed to cooperate with the 
Board 
of 
Attorneys 
Professional 
Responsibility's 
(Board) 
 
No. 96-0055-D 
 
 
 
2 
investigation into the matter.  The referee also recommended that 
Attorney Sylvan be required to make restitution to the estate for 
the excessive fee he charged and received.   
 
We determine that the seriousness of Attorney Sylvan's 
professional misconduct and his apparent failure to appreciate its 
seriousness warrant a 60-day suspension of his license to practice 
law.  It is also appropriate that he be required to make 
restitution to the estate for the amount by which the fee he 
charged and collected exceeded a reasonable amount.   
 
Attorney Sylvan was admitted to practice law in Wisconsin in 
1959 and practiced in Menomonee Falls.  He has not been the 
subject of a prior disciplinary proceeding but has been suspended 
from the practice of law since June, 1994 for failure to comply 
with continuing legal education requirements.  Because of his 
failure to file an answer to the Board's complaint, the referee, 
Attorney Jean DiMotto, granted the Board's motion for default and 
made findings of fact based on the Board's complaint.   
 
Attorney Sylvan was retained in January, 1992 to probate the 
estate of a client's mother.  That estate consisted of solely 
owned property in the amount of approximately $353,000, in the 
form of certificates of deposit, savings bonds, a treasury note, a 
demand note, a checking account, a life insurance policy and 
miscellaneous stock.  Attorney Sylvan commenced informal probate 
and after filing the general inventory did nothing in the estate 
for more than a year.  The probate court notified him in June, 
 
No. 96-0055-D 
 
 
 
3 
1993 that four items were needed to close the estate:  the 
judgment on claims, a closing certificate for fiduciaries, 
receipts and a statement to close.  The court stated that if the 
estate were not closed promptly, it would issue an order to show 
cause.  Soon after receiving that letter from the court, Attorney 
Sylvan assured the personal representative that there would be no 
difficulty getting everything completed to close the estate 
promptly.   
 
When the estate was not closed six months later, the court 
issued an order to show cause, and on the return date Attorney 
Sylvan filed the receipts and the closing certificate and obtained 
a two-month extension to furnish the remaining two items.  When 
nothing was done over the next three months and Attorney Sylvan 
failed to appear at the adjourned return date on the order to show 
cause, the court removed him as attorney for the estate and 
appointed a successor, who promptly closed the estate, charging 
$150 to do so.   
 
After filing the application for informal probate, Attorney 
Sylvan did not communicate with or respond to the inquiries of the 
personal representative for extended periods of time, despite 
numerous attempts by the personal representative to contact him by 
telephone.  As a result, the personal representative experienced 
needless concern and anxiety.   
 
The probate of the estate was simple and uncomplicated in 
view of the nature of the assets and the number and identity of 
 
No. 96-0055-D 
 
 
 
4 
the beneficiaries.  Moreover, the personal representative handled 
liquidation and distribution of the assets to the beneficiaries.  
Also, Attorney Sylvan did not prepare or file the estate tax 
returns.  Yet, Attorney Sylvan, who kept no time records for the 
work he performed in the probate, charged and received fees of 
$10,598, representing three percent of the estate's asset value, 
despite a statutory proscription of percentage fees in probate, 
Wis. Stat. §  851.40(2)(e).1  The referee found that the maximum 
reasonable fee to which an experienced attorney would be entitled 
for the probate of this estate is $2500.   
 
When the Board requested a response to the personal 
representative's grievance, Attorney Sylvan did not respond.  He 
also did not respond to a second letter from the Board.  After it 
discovered that Attorney Sylvan's office telephone had been 
disconnected, the Board learned where he was residing and 
telephoned him there, leaving a message on his answering machine. 
 Attorney Sylvan did not return that call or respond to another 
                     
     1  Wis. Stat. §  851.40 (1993-94) provides, in part:  Basis 
for attorney fees.   
 
. . . 
 
(2)  Any personal representative, heir, beneficiary under a 
will or other interested party may petition the court to review 
any attorney's fee which is subject to sub. (1).  If the decedent 
died intestate or the testator's will contains no provision 
concerning attorney fees, the court shall consider the following 
factors in determining what is just and reasonable attorney's fee: 
  
 
. . . 
 
(e)  The sufficiency of assets properly available to pay for 
the services, except that the value of the estate may not be the 
controlling factor.   
 
No. 96-0055-D 
 
 
 
5 
letter sent to his new address.  When the grievance was referred 
to 
the 
district 
professional 
responsibility 
committee 
for 
investigation, Attorney Sylvan met with the investigator and 
admitted that he had received the Board's inquiries but gave no 
reason for not responding to them or cooperating with the Board.   
 
The referee concluded that Attorney Sylvan's failure to 
probate the estate with reasonable diligence and promptness 
violated 
SCR 
20:1.3;2 
his 
failure 
to 
keep 
the 
personal 
representative reasonably informed of the status of the probate 
and reply to reasonable requests for information violated SCR 
20:1.4(a);3 his charging an excessive and unreasonable fee 
violated SCR 20:1.5(a)4 and, because it was contrary to statute, 
                     
     2  SCR 20:1.3 provides:  Diligence 
 
A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness 
in representing a client.   
     3  SCR 20:1.4 provides, in pertinent part:  Communication 
 
(a)  A lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about 
the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable 
requests for information.   
     4  SCR 20:1.5 provides, in pertinent part:  Fees 
 
(a)  A lawyer's fee shall be reasonable.  The factors to be 
considered in determining the reasonableness of a fee include the 
following:   
 
(1)  the time and labor required, the novelty and difficulty 
of the questions involved, and the skill requisite to perform the 
legal service properly; 
 
(2)  the likelihood, if apparent to the client, that the 
acceptance of the particular employment will preclude other 
employment by the lawyer; 
 
(3)  the fee customarily charged in the locality for similar 
legal services; 
 
(4)  the amount involved and the results obtained; 
 
(5)  the time limitations imposed by the client or by the 
circumstances; 
 
(6)  the nature and length of the professional relationship 
 
No. 96-0055-D 
 
 
 
6 
also violated SCR 20:8.4(f).5  Finally, Attorney Sylvan's failure 
to cooperate with the Board's investigation violated SCR 21.03(4)6 
and 22.07(2).7   
 
As discipline for that misconduct, the referee recommended a 
60-day license suspension.  That recommendation was based, in 
part, on Attorney Sylvan's conduct during the course of the 
disciplinary proceeding:  he failed for over seven weeks to 
respond to the complaint, although he did appear at the hearing on 
(..continued) 
with the client; 
 
(7)  the experience, reputation, and ability of the lawyer or 
lawyers performing the services; and 
 
(8)  whether the fee is fixed or contingent.   
     5  SCR 20:8.4 provides, in pertinent part:  Misconduct 
 
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; 
     6  SCR 21.03 provides, in pertinent part:  General 
principles. 
 
. . . 
 
(4)  Every attorney shall cooperate with the board and the 
administrator in the investigation, prosecution and disposition of 
grievances and complaints filed with or by the board or 
administrator.   
     7  SCR 22.07 provides, in pertinent part:  Investigation. 
 
. . . 
 
(2)  During the course of an investigation, the administrator 
or a committee may notify the respondent of the subject being 
investigated.  The respondent shall fully and fairly disclose all 
facts and circumstances pertaining to the alleged misconduct or 
medical incapacity within 20 days of being served by ordinary mail 
a request for response to a grievance.  The administrator in his 
or her discretion may allow additional time to respond.  Failure 
to provide information or misrepresentation in a disclosure is 
misconduct.  The administrator or committee may make a further 
investigation before making a recommendation to the board.   
 
No. 96-0055-D 
 
 
 
7 
the default judgment motion; he twice failed to name witnesses to 
establish mitigation on his claim of physical and mental illness; 
he failed to give notice of the location where he might be 
reached, even when replying to the referee's specific request that 
he do so.  The referee viewed such conduct as demonstrating 
Attorney Sylvan's failure to appreciate the seriousness of this 
disciplinary proceeding.   
 
The 
referee further determined that Attorney Sylvan's 
statements at the hearing demonstrated his failure to appreciate 
the seriousness and wrongfulness of his misconduct.  At that 
hearing, Attorney Sylvan took the position that a client's 
agreement to a fee or a court's approval of it without knowledge 
of its excessiveness or that it was calculated on an impermissible 
basis mitigated if not obviated the problem.  He also took the 
position in his brief on sanction that his offer to repay the 
personal representative the $150 paid to successor counsel to 
close the estate constituted sufficient restitution.   
 
In addition to the suspension, the referee recommended that 
Attorney Sylvan be required to make restitution to the estate in 
the amount of $8,098, the amount by which his fee exceeded a 
reasonable fee for his work in the matter.  The referee also 
recommended that Attorney Sylvan be required to pay the costs of 
this proceeding.   
 
We adopt the referee's findings of fact and conclusions of 
law and determine that Attorney Sylvan's professional misconduct, 
 
No. 96-0055-D 
 
 
 
8 
viewed in light of his conduct in the course of this proceeding, 
warrant the 60-day license suspension recommended by the referee. 
 In addition, he is required to make restitution to the estate as 
the referee recommended.   
 
IT IS ORDERED that the license of Attorney Ronald W. Sylvan 
to practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period of 60 days, 
effective the date of the order.   
 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date of this 
order Ronald W. Sylvan make restitution in the amount of $8,098 as 
set forth in the referee's report.   
 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date of this 
order Ronald W. Sylvan pay to the Board of Attorneys Professional 
Responsibility the costs of this proceeding, provided that 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 Ronald W. Sylvan to practice law in Wisconsin shall 
remain suspended until further order of the court.   
 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Ronald W. Sylvan 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. 96-0055-D 
 
 
 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
                                                              
 
Case No.: 
 
96-0055-D 
                                                              
 
Complete Title 
of Case: 
In the Matter of Disciplinary 
 
 
 
Proceedings Against  
 
 
 
Ronald Sylvan, 
 
 
 
Attorney at Law. 
 
 
 
______________________________ 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST SYLVAN 
 
 
                                                              
 
Opinion Filed:  
June 21, 1996 
Submitted on Briefs: 
 
Oral Argument: 
 
 
                                                              
 
Source of APPEAL 
 
COURT: 
 
 
COUNTY: 
 
 
JUDGE: 
 
 
                                                              
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
Concurred: 
 
 
Dissented: 
 
 
Not Participating: 
 
                                                              
 
ATTORNEYS: