2020 WI 10

SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN

CASE NO.: 2019AP1775-D

COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 

Against Robert W. Horsch, Attorney at Law:

Office of Lawyer Regulation,

 Complainant,

 v.

Robert W. Horsch,

 Respondent.

DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HORSCH

OPINION FILED: February 7, 2020 

SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 

ORAL ARGUMENT: 

SOURCE OF APPEAL:

COURT: 

COUNTY: 

JUDGE: 

JUSTICES:

NOT PARTICIPATING:

 

ATTORNEYS:
2020 WI 10

NOTICE

This opinion is subject to further 

editing and modification. The final 

version will appear in the bound 

volume of the official reports. 

No. 2019AP1775-D

STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT

In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 

Against Robert W. Horsch, Attorney at Law:

Office of Lawyer Regulation,

 Complainant,

 v.

Robert W. Horsch,

 Respondent.

FILED

FEB 7, 2020

Sheila T. Reiff

Clerk of Supreme Court

ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney's license 

suspended. 

¶1 PER CURIAM. We review a stipulation filed pursuant to 

Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 22.121 by the Office of Lawyer Regulation 

 

1 SCR 22.12 provides:

(1) The director may file with the complaint a 

stipulation of the director and the respondent to the 

facts, conclusions of law regarding misconduct, and 

discipline to be imposed. The supreme court may consider 

the complaint and stipulation without the appointment of 

a referee, in which case the supreme court may approve 

the stipulation, reject the stipulation, or direct the 

parties to consider specific modifications to the 

stipulation.
No. 2019AP1775-D 

2

(OLR) and Attorney Robert W. Horsch. In the stipulation, Attorney 

Horsch admits that he violated SCR 20:8.4(b)2 and agrees that a 

three-year suspension of his law license is appropriate. 

¶2 After careful review of the matter, we accept the 

stipulation. Because Attorney Horsch entered into a comprehensive 

stipulation prior to the appointment of a referee, we do not 

require him to pay the costs of this proceeding.

¶3 Attorney Horsch was admitted to practice law in 

Wisconsin in 2003. His law license has been suspended since June 

2, 2014 for failure to comply with continuing legal education 

 

(2) If the supreme court approves a stipulation, it 

shall adopt the stipulated facts and conclusions of law 

and impose the stipulated discipline. 

(3) If the supreme court rejects a stipulation, a 

referee shall be appointed and the matter shall proceed 

as a complaint filed without a stipulation. 

(3m) If the supreme court directs the parties to 

consider specific modifications to the stipulation, the 

parties may, within 20 days of the date of the order, 

file a revised stipulation, in which case the supreme 

court may approve the revised stipulation, adopt the 

stipulated facts and conclusions of law, and impose the 

stipulated discipline. If the parties do not file a 

revised stipulation within 20 days of the date of the 

order, a referee shall be appointed and the matter shall 

proceed as a complaint filed without a stipulation. 

(4) A stipulation rejected by the supreme court has 

no evidentiary value and is without prejudice to the 

respondent's defense of the proceeding or the 

prosecution of the complaint. 

2 SCR 20:8.4(b) provides: "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."
No. 2019AP1775-D 

3

requirements, since October 31, 2014 for failure to pay State Bar 

of Wisconsin dues and certify trust account information, and since 

December 21, 2017 for professional misconduct. 

¶4 Attorney Horsch's disciplinary history consists of two 

prior matters: (1) a 2015 private reprimand with consent, for 

engaging in conduct leading to a criminal conviction in violation 

of SCR 20:8.4(b); and practicing law while his license was 

suspended in violation of SCR 22.26(2), enforceable via SCR 

20:8.4(f). Private Reprimand 2015-5 (electronic copy available at 

https://compendium.wicourts.gov/app/raw/002761.html); and (2) a 

60-day suspension of his license to practice law in Wisconsin 

imposed in 2017 for engaging in conduct leading to a criminal 

conviction in violation of SCR 20:8.4(b); failing to report the 

conviction to the court and the OLR in violation of SCR 21.15(5), 

enforceable via SCR 20:8.4(f); and failing to respond to the OLR's 

investigative letters in violation of SCR 22.03(2) and 

SCR 22.03(6), enforceable via SCR 20:8.4(h). In re Disciplinary 

Proceedings Against Horsch, 2017 WI 105, 378 Wis. 2d 554, 905 

N.W.2d 129.

¶5 The actions giving rise to this misconduct proceeding 

occurred on May 1, 2018. Attorney Horsch was driving with five of 

his children as passengers. He did not secure his two youngest 

children into their car seats. The two children, 22 months and 

three years old, fell out of the rear doors of the moving van and 

were injured, one seriously. Attorney Horsch continued to drive,

unaware the children had fallen from the van. Other motorists 

witnessed the incident and rescued the two children from the 
No. 2019AP1775-D 

4

roadway. The children were transported to a hospital, treated,

and identified. Police then went to Attorney Horsch's residence 

to speak with him. 

¶6 The responding officer suspected that Attorney Horsch 

was under the influence of a non-alcoholic intoxicant. Attorney 

Horsch refused to perform field sobriety tests but submitted to a 

breathalyzer test. A warrant was obtained, a blood test performed,

and the results showed an exceedingly high level of 

dextromethorphan, a controlled substance commonly found in cough 

medicine.

¶7 On September 10, 2018, Attorney Horsch was charged with 

eight felonies, including neglecting a child resulting in great 

bodily harm, neglecting a child resulting in harm, knowingly 

operating a motor vehicle while revoked resulting in great bodily 

harm and five counts of operating while intoxicated (OWI) for a 

5th or 6th offense with a passenger under the age of 16. State v. 

Horsch, Sheboygan County Circuit Court, No. 2018CF289.

¶8 On February 5, 2019, he pled guilty to and was convicted 

of one felony count of neglect of a child resulting in great bodily 

harm, and one felony count of operating a motor vehicle while 

intoxicated (5th or 6th offense) with a passenger under the age of 

16. Two charges (child neglect causing bodily harm and operating 

while revoked) were dismissed but read in. The four remaining 

charges were dismissed. Attorney Horsch was sentenced to three 

years and six months prison, and five years of extended 

supervision. 
No. 2019AP1775-D 

5

¶9 On September 19, 2019, the OLR filed a disciplinary 

complaint alleging that by engaging in the conduct leading to the 

two felony convictions, Attorney Horsch violated SCR 20:8.4(b). 

Supreme Court Rule 20:8.4(b) provides 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."

¶10 Attorney Horsch stipulated to the factual allegations in 

the OLR's complaint, to the alleged misconduct, and to a threeyear suspension of his law license. The stipulation states that 

it did not result from plea-bargaining. In the stipulation 

Attorney Horsch states that he fully understands the misconduct 

allegations; that he fully understands the ramifications should 

the court impose the stipulated level of discipline; that he fully 

understands his right to contest this matter; that he fully 

understands his right to consult with counsel; that his entry into 

this stipulation is made knowingly and voluntarily; that he has 

read the complaint and the stipulation; and that his entry into 

the stipulation represents his decision not to contest the 

misconduct alleged in the complaint or the level and type of 

discipline sought by the OLR's Director. Attorney Horsch notes 

that he is incarcerated and is indigent and asks the court to waive 

the costs of this proceeding.

¶11 We consider this stipulation without the appointment of 

a referee. SCR 22.12. We first consider whether the felony 

conviction constitutes a violation of SCR 20:8.4(b). The question 

is whether the criminal act committed by Attorney Horsch reflects 
No. 2019AP1775-D 

6

adversely on his honesty, trustworthiness, or his "fitness as a 

lawyer in other respects." This is a fact dependent inquiry. 

Indeed, in one instance we determined that a lawyer's felony 

conviction for a deadly one-vehicle drunk driving accident did not 

violate SCR 20:8.4(b). In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against 

Johns, 2014 WI 32, 353 Wis. 2d 746, 847 N.W.2d 179 (holding that 

lawyer's conduct did not violate SCR 20:8.4(b) in light of the 

record evidence indicating the exceedingly anomalous nature of the 

tragic incident with respect to Attorney Johns' overall conduct). 

¶12 By contrast, this was not Attorney Horsch's first 

criminal or disciplinary offense. A pattern of convictions 

"evinces a serious lack of respect for the law and as such 

relate[s] to [a lawyer's] 'fitness as a lawyer in other respects.'"

In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Brandt, 2009 WI 43, ¶42,

317 Wis. 2d 266, 766 N.W.2d 194 (discussing a lawyer's multiple 

OWI convictions). We agree that Attorney Horsch's commission of 

the criminal act in this instance violated SCR 20:8.4(b). 

¶13 The next question is the appropriate sanction for the 

admitted misconduct. In support of the three-year suspension to 

which the parties stipulated, the OLR emphasizes that Attorney 

Horsch's misconduct was intentional, and that he has been convicted 

four times previously for operating a vehicle while intoxicated. 

The OLR cites several disciplinary cases in support of the threeyear suspension, including In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against 

Evenson, 2015 WI 38, 361 Wis. 2d 629, 861 N.W.2d 786 (imposing 30-

month license suspension based on conviction for one felony count 

of delivery of a controlled substance and two misdemeanor 
No. 2019AP1775-D 

7

convictions for fourth-degree sexual assault, where the lawyer had 

one prior public reprimand); In re Disciplinary Proceedings 

Against Moore, 2013 WI 96, 351 Wis. 2d 332, 839 N.W.2d 605

(imposing three-year license suspension for mishandling of a 

guardianship matter, and lawyer's conviction of misdemeanor 

possession of a controlled substance (THC) and drug paraphernalia 

where the lawyer had no prior disciplinary history); In re 

Disciplinary Proceedings Against Woodmansee, 147 Wis. 2d 837, 434 

N.W.2d 94 (1989) (imposing three-year license suspension for 

conviction for fourth-degree sexual assault of a client where 

lawyer had no prior disciplinary history); and In re Disciplinary 

Proceedings Against Stokes, 2012 WI 105, 343 Wis. 2d 561, 818 

N.W.2d 924 (revoking law license for conviction of one count of 

felony theft for overbilling the State Public Defender's office of 

over $19,000 in fees where lawyer had two prior reprimands).

¶14 We have some concerns that the three-year suspension to 

which the parties stipulated is overly long, even considering that 

the discipline imposed in lawyer misconduct cases is generally 

progressive. See, e.g., In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against 

Nussberger, 2006 WI 111, ¶27, 296 Wis. 2d 47, 719 N.W.2d 501. 

While the cases cited by the OLR bear some resemblance to this 

case, each also involves some conduct that is quite distinct from 

what occurred here. This is not a case in which the attorney 

abused his professional status as a lawyer in committing a criminal 

act. Attorney Horsch violated no practice norms, harmed no 

clients, and did not benefit from his misconduct. He has been 

arrested, convicted, sentenced, and is incarcerated for his 
No. 2019AP1775-D 

8

actions. The OLR does not cite to the Johns case, which has some 

parallels: both involved a lawyer driving under the influence,

with family in the vehicle, and with a tragic result. No 

suspension was imposed in that case. Johns, 353 Wis. 2d 746. We 

also find instructive In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against 

Brandt, 2012 WI 8, 338 Wis. 2d 524, 808 N.W.2d 687, where we 

imposed a four-month suspension on Attorney Brandt, consistent 

with the parties' stipulation, after he received a felony 

conviction in Minnesota of first-degree driving while intoxicated 

within ten years of the first of three or more qualified prior 

impaired driving incidents. 

¶15 However, we recognize that the three-year suspension to 

which the parties stipulated correlates roughly with the prison 

sentence imposed on Attorney Horsch. A lengthy suspension is 

appropriate to ensure that Attorney Horsch is precluded from 

practicing law while incarcerated for a criminal conviction. See, 

e.g., In re Paine, 625 S.E.2d 768 (Ga. 2006) (suspending attorney 

from the practice of law until his probation on a felony conviction 

is terminated). So, despite our concern that a three-year 

suspension is excessive given the nature of the admitted 

misconduct, we accept the parties' stipulation. 

¶16 Considering all of the above, we accept the stipulation,

adopt the stipulated facts and conclusions of law, and we suspend 

Attorney Horsch's law license for a period of three years. Because 

this matter has been resolved by stipulation without the 

appointment of a referee and the OLR has not sought the imposition 

of any costs, we impose no costs. Therefore,
No. 2019AP1775-D 

9

¶17 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Robert W. Horsch to 

practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period of three years,

effective the date of this order. 

¶18 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if he has not already done 

so, Robert W. Horsch shall comply with the provisions of SCR 22.26 

regarding the duties of a person whose license to practice law in 

Wisconsin has been suspended.
No. 2019AP1775-D 

1