2014 WI 17

SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN

CASE NO.: 2013AP1362-D 

COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 

Against Randy J. Wynn, Attorney at Law:

Office of Lawyer Regulation,

 Complainant,

 v.

Randy J. Wynn,

 Respondent.

DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST WYNN

OPINION FILED: March 26, 2014

SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 

ORAL ARGUMENT:

SOURCE OF APPEAL:

COURT: 

COUNTY:

JUDGE:

JUSTICES:

CONCURRED: 

DISSENTED: 

NOT PARTICIPATING: ABRAHAMSON, C.J., did not participate. 

ATTORNEYS:
2014 WI 17

NOTICE

This opinion is subject to further 

editing and modification. The final 

version will appear in the bound 

volume of the official reports. 

No. 2013AP1362-D

STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT

In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 

Against Randy J. Wynn, Attorney at Law:

Office of Lawyer Regulation,

 Complainant,

 v.

Randy J. Wynn,

 Respondent.

FILED

MAR 26, 2014

Diane M. Fremgen

Clerk of Supreme Court

ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney's license 

revoked. 

¶1 PER CURIAM. Attorney Randy J. Wynn has filed a 

petition for consensual license revocation under SCR 22.19.1

 

1 SCR 22.19 states as follows: Petition for consensual 

license revocation.

(1) An attorney who is the subject of an 

investigation for possible misconduct or the 

respondent in a proceeding may file with the supreme 

court a petition for the revocation by consent or his 

or her license to practice law. 
No. 2013AP1362-D 

2

¶2 Attorney Wynn's license has been suspended since 

August 9, 2013, pending receipt of additional information needed 

to render a restitution order. The Office of Lawyer Regulation 

(OLR) has provided this court with the most complete accounting 

available and the parties have agreed that it is a final 

accounting for purposes of this petition. Accordingly, we 

accept the petition, direct Attorney Wynn to pay restitution as 

set forth herein, and revoke Attorney Wynn's license to practice 

law in Wisconsin.

 

(2) The petition shall state that the petitioner 

cannot successfully defend against the allegations of 

misconduct.

(3) If a complaint has not been filed, the 

petition shall be filed in the supreme court and shall 

include the director's summary of the misconduct 

allegations being investigated. Within 20 days after 

the date of filing of the petition, the director shall 

file in the supreme court a recommendation on the 

petition. Upon a showing of good cause, the supreme 

court may extend the time for filing a recommendation.

(4) If a complaint has been filed, the petition 

shall be filed in the supreme court and served on the 

director and on the referee to whom the proceeding has 

been assigned. Within 20 days after the filing of the 

petition, the director shall file in the supreme court

a response in support of or in opposition to the 

petition and serve a copy on the referee. Upon a 

showing of good cause, the supreme court may extend 

the time for filing a response. The referee shall 

file a report and recommendation on the petition in 

the supreme court within 30 days after receipt of the 

director's response.

(5) The supreme court shall grant the petition 

and revoke the petitioner's license to practice law or 

deny the petition and remand the matter to the 

director or to the referee for further proceedings.
No. 2013AP1362-D 

3

¶3 Attorney Wynn was admitted to the practice of law in 

Wisconsin in 1979. He is a solo practitioner from West Allis 

who, until his suspension, worked primarily in the area of debt 

collection. He has no previous disciplinary history.

¶4 In November 2012 Attorney Wynn self-reported to the 

Milwaukee County District Attorney's Office (MCDA) and to the 

OLR that he had stolen money from his IOLTA client trust account 

to fund a severe gambling addiction and to pay personal bills. 

The funds in Attorney Wynn's trust account were generated from 

money judgments that Attorney Wynn secured on behalf of various 

clients. Attorney Wynn admitted that he had taken a significant 

amount of money from his trust account over the past several 

years; he was not certain of the exact amount.

¶5 In March 2013 Attorney Wynn provided the MCDA with a 

partial accounting in which he identified dozens of clients from 

whom he had taken funds totaling $450,923.04. In May 2013 

Attorney Wynn provided the OLR with a second partial accounting 

showing that Attorney Wynn had taken $784,734.87 from numerous 

clients. Attorney Wynn estimated this second partial accounting 

was "90% complete." 

¶6 The matter came to our attention in June 2013 when 

Attorney Wynn filed his petition for consensual license 

revocation. The OLR supported the petition and provided the 

court with a copy of the second partial accounting. The OLR 

recommended we require Attorney Wynn to make restitution to the 

persons and entities identified on the second partial 

accounting. However, the parties conceded that specific, 
No. 2013AP1362-D 

4

accurate restitution amounts and apportionments were not readily 

ascertainable. The OLR asked the court to calculate set-offs to 

which Attorney Wynn may be entitled, and recommended Attorney 

Wynn should be required to verify the funds owed. The OLR also 

informed the court that criminal charges from Milwaukee County 

were expected and recommended Attorney Wynn be required to 

comply with any future restitution order that might be entered 

by the Milwaukee County circuit court.2

¶7 This court issued an order directing Attorney Wynn to 

show cause why his license should not be temporarily suspended 

pending further inquiry to ensure the court had the most 

complete accounting possible for purposes of awarding 

restitution to injured clients. Attorney Wynn was temporarily 

suspended on August 9, 2013, and the court subsequently ordered 

the parties to file additional information relating to a final 

accounting.

¶8 On November 21, 2013, the OLR filed the requested 

status update. With the information provided by the OLR we are 

prepared to proceed with Attorney Wynn's petition.

¶9 We agree that revocation is warranted and necessary. 

This has never been in dispute. Attorney Wynn admitted he used 

his law practice to misappropriate over three-quarters of a 

million dollars from numerous persons and entities. Attorney 

Wynn acknowledged that he cannot successfully defend against 

misconduct allegations and further acknowledges that he will owe 

 

2 The OLR later withdrew this recommendation.
No. 2013AP1362-D 

5

restitution to the clients he has harmed. He notes that he is 

represented by counsel regarding his criminal liability and has 

opted to proceed pro se in this disciplinary matter. We grant 

the petition and we revoke Attorney Wynn's license to practice 

law in Wisconsin.

¶10 With respect to restitution, the OLR informs the court 

that the second partial accounting filed with the court in June 

2013 remains the most complete accounting available. We are 

further advised that the information in that list has now been 

verified by Attorney Wynn; reflects appropriate offsets due 

Attorney Wynn; and is agreeable to the parties to be final for 

purposes of this petition. The MCDA has performed spot-checks 

and cross-referencing of the information in the document, and 

reported satisfactory results to the OLR. The OLR adds that 

Attorney Wynn confirms his intent to make restitution as set 

forth herein, as well as his intent to make restitution to any 

other clients who may be owed money but do not yet appear on any 

listing.

¶11 We accept the OLR's recommendation and we direct 

Attorney Wynn to make restitution to the persons and entities 
No. 2013AP1362-D 

6

and in the amounts as shown on Exhibit 1-B, filed by the OLR on 

November 21, 2013.3

¶12 The OLR does not recommend we impose any further 

conditions upon Attorney Wynn at this time. We accept the OLR's 

explanation that the issue of appropriate conditions is best 

addressed in the context of reinstatement. Should Attorney Wynn 

ever seek reinstatement of his Wisconsin law license he will be 

required to prove that he has made restitution to or settled all 

claims of all persons injured or harmed by his misconduct, 

including reimbursement to the State Bar of Wisconsin Lawyers' 

Fund for Client Protection for all payments made by that fund, 

or, if restitution has not been made, Attorney Wynn will need to 

explain his failure or inability to do so. See SCR 22.29 (4m).

¶13 The filings do not mention costs. In view of Attorney 

Wynn's apparent intention to cooperate fully with authorities 

 

3 After the petition was filed, the OLR filed a detailed 

five-page list, entitled Exhibit 1, identifying clients and the 

amounts of restitution apparently owed to them. In June 2013 we 

asked the OLR to clarify whether the names of these potential 

victims should be redacted to protect their privacy. The OLR 

responded that it did not deem redaction necessary but provided 

the court with a redacted version of Exhibit 1, in which names 

were replaced with initials. We directed the Clerk of Supreme 

Court to seal, until further order of this court, the original 

Exhibit 1 and we accepted redacted Exhibit 1 for filing. 

The parties have now verified appropriate offsets and, to 

assist the court, the OLR has filed a new document, entitled 

Exhibit 1-B, listing clients and the restitution they are owed, 

after offsets. We will not redact the client names set forth on 

Exhibit 1-B.
No. 2013AP1362-D 

7

and meet his restitution obligations we decline to impose costs 

in this matter.

¶14 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Attorney Randy J. 

Wynn to practice law in Wisconsin is revoked effective the date 

of this order.

¶15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Randy J. Wynn shall comply 

with the provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of an 

attorney whose license to practice law has been revoked, to the 

extent he has not already done so.

¶16 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Randy J. Wynn shall pay 

restitution to the persons and entities identified in Exhibit 1-

B, filed with the court on November 21, 2013.

¶17 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no costs are imposed in 

this matter.

¶18 SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, C.J., did not participate.
No. 2013AP1362-D 

1