Case Name: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Carl L. Peterson, Attorney at Law
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Wisconsin
Decision Date: 1992-10-29
Citations: 171 Wis. 2d 353
Docket Number: No. 92-2342-D
Parties: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Carl L. Peterson, Attorney at Law.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wisconsin Reports Second
Volume: 171
Pages: 353–354

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Carl L. Peterson, Attorney at Law.
Supreme Court
No. 92-2342-D.
Filed October 29, 1992.
(Also reported in 490 N.W.2d 528.)

Opinion:
ORDER
On September 18,1992 the Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility (Board) filed a report recommending that the court grant the petition of Attorney Carl L. Peterson for the revocation by consent of his license to practice law, pursuant to SCR 21.10(1). In that petition, Attorney Peterson stated that he is unable to successfully defend against allegations that he converted to his own use estate assets held in trust. Attorney Peterson was admitted to practice law in Wisconsin in 1952 and, prior to discontinuing practice, practiced in Menomonie. He has not previously been the subject of an attorney disciplinary proceeding.
The misconduct allegations concerned Attorney Peterson's handling of the funds of an estate in which he acted as attorney from July, 1990 to February, 1992. The Board's investigation disclosed that Attorney Peterson converted approximately $342,000 of estate funds, which he used for personal purposes. By doing so, the Board alleged, Attorney Peterson engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud and deceit, in violation of SCR 20:8.4(c).
It Is Ordered that the petition is granted and the license of Carl L. Peterson to practice law in Wisconsin is revoked by consent, effective the date of this order.
It Is Further Ordered that Carl L. Peterson comply with the provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of a person whose license to practice law in Wisconsin has been revoked.
Marilyn L. Graves Clerk of Supreme Court