Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Sergio Magana
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 2016AP001385-D
State: Wisconsin
Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Date: November 28, 2017

2017 WI 97 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2016AP1385-D 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Sergio Magaña, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
Sergio Magaña, 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST MAGAÑA 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
November 28, 2017 
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
      
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
      
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
      
 
COUNTY: 
      
 
JUDGE: 
      
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
      
 
DISSENTED: 
      
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:          
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
 
      
 
 
2017 WI 97
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.   2016AP1385-D 
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Sergio Magaña, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Sergio Magaña, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
NOV 28, 2017 
 
Diane M. Fremgen 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY 
disciplinary 
proceeding.   Attorney's 
license 
revoked.   
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.   We review Referee Jonathan V. Goodman's 
recommendation that the court declare Attorney Sergio Magaña in 
default and revoke his Wisconsin law license in connection with 
his work in 22 client matters, his non-cooperation with the 
Office of Lawyer Regulation's (OLR) investigation into his 
conduct, 
his 
conviction 
for 
misdemeanor 
operating 
while 
intoxicated (second offense), and his failure to report that 
conviction to the OLR and the clerk of this court.  The referee 
No. 
2016AP1385-D   
 
2 
 
also recommended that Attorney Magaña be ordered to pay 
restitution and the costs of this proceeding. 
¶2 
Because no appeal has been filed, we review the 
referee's report pursuant to Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 22.17(2).1  
After conducting our independent review of the matter, we agree 
with the referee that, based on Attorney Magaña's failure to 
answer the amended complaint filed and served by the OLR, the 
OLR is entitled to a default judgment.  We also agree with the 
referee that Attorney Magaña's professional misconduct warrants 
the revocation of his law license.  We further agree that 
Attorney Magaña should pay restitution in the amounts described 
below, and that he should pay the full costs of this proceeding. 
¶3 
Attorney Magaña was admitted to practice law in 
Wisconsin in September 2012.  According to the OLR's amended 
complaint and the referee's report, Attorney Magaña's law 
license has been suspended for nonpayment of bar dues and for 
                                                 
1 SCR 22.17(2) provides: 
If no appeal is filed timely, the supreme court 
shall review the referee's report; adopt, reject or 
modify the referee's findings and conclusions or 
remand the matter to the referee for additional 
findings; 
and 
determine 
and 
impose 
appropriate 
discipline.  The court, on its own motion, may order 
the parties to file briefs in the matter. 
No. 
2016AP1385-D   
 
3 
 
failing 
to 
comply 
with 
the 
trust 
account 
certification 
requirements.2 
¶4 
In July 2016, the OLR filed a complaint against 
Attorney Magaña that raised 27 counts of misconduct committed in 
eight client matters:  E.S. (Counts 1-4); M.M.-M. (Counts 5-8); 
G.A.H. (Counts 9-12); A.G. (Counts 13-15); O.M.G. (Counts 16-
19); A.L. (Counts 20-22); M.S. (Counts 23-24); and M.R. (Counts 
25-27).  In August 2016, Attorney Magaña filed an answer to the 
complaint in which he admitted some counts of misconduct and 
denied the remainder. 
¶5 
In mid-October and mid-December 2016, the referee sent 
correspondence to Attorney Magaña requesting that he contact the 
referee to set a date for a scheduling conference.  Attorney 
Magaña did not respond. 
¶6 
On December 27, 2016, the OLR filed an amended 
complaint against Attorney Magaña that raised 74 counts of 
misconduct.  Seventy-two of these counts concerned misconduct 
allegedly committed in 22 client matters:  E.S. (Counts 1-4); 
M.M.-M. (Counts 5-8); A.H. (Counts 9-12); A.G. (Counts 13-15); 
O.M.G. (Counts 16-19); A.L. (Counts 20-22); M.S. (Counts 23-24); 
M.R. (Counts 25-27); J.B.G. (Counts 28-29); J.F.C. (Counts 30-
                                                 
2 According to the State Bar of Wisconsin's website, 
Attorney Magaña's law license is in good standing, but is in 
inactive status, which means that he is not engaged in the 
practice of law in Wisconsin.  See State Bar of Wisconsin, 
www.wisbar.org 
(last 
visited 
Sept. 
25, 
2017); 
see 
also 
SCR 10.03(3)(Membership). 
No. 
2016AP1385-D   
 
4 
 
34); R.A. (Counts 35-38); A.A. (Counts 39-41); A.C.C. (Counts 
42-45); A.D. (Counts 46-49); R.G. (Counts 50-51); F.M. (Counts 
52-53); F.R.A. (Counts 54-56); C.R. (Counts 57-60); I.R.M. and 
I.I. (Counts 61-64); I.M. (Counts 65-66); M.S. (Counts 67-70); 
and N.S.M. (Counts 71-72).  Two additional counts (Counts 73-74) 
related 
to 
Attorney 
Magaña's 
misdemeanor 
operating 
while 
intoxicated (second offense) conviction, entered in April 2014, 
and his subsequent failure to report the same to the OLR and the 
clerk of this court.  The OLR served the amended complaint on 
Attorney Magaña via U.S. Mail.   
¶7 
On February 2, 2017, Attorney Magaña filed a request 
for additional time to respond to the OLR's amended complaint.  
Attorney Magaña confirmed that he had received the amended 
complaint via U.S. Mail, but claimed that his receipt of the 
document had been delayed because he had been away on a "holiday 
break" at the time the OLR had mailed it.  He further alleged 
that the breadth of the allegations necessitated additional time 
for his response.  Although the OLR agreed in writing to extend 
the answer deadline to March 15, 2017, Attorney Magaña failed to 
answer by that date, prompting the OLR to file a motion for 
default judgment in April 2017.  The referee set the matter for 
a telephonic hearing at which Attorney Magaña failed to appear.  
On June 26, 2017, the referee filed a report recommending that 
Attorney Magaña be declared in default; concluding that Attorney 
Magaña engaged in serious professional misconduct warranting 
license revocation; and recommending that the court order 
No. 
2016AP1385-D   
 
5 
 
Attorney Magaña to pay both the full costs of this proceeding 
and restitution in certain specified amounts.   
¶8 
Attorney Magaña has not filed an appeal from the 
referee's report and recommendation.  Accordingly, our review 
proceeds pursuant to SCR 22.17(2).  
¶9 
A referee's findings of fact are affirmed unless 
clearly erroneous.  Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo.  
See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Eisenberg, 2004 WI 
14, ¶5, 269 Wis. 2d 43, 675 N.W.2d 747.  The court may impose 
whatever sanction it sees fit, regardless of the referee's 
recommendation.  See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against 
Widule, 2003 WI 34, ¶44, 261 Wis. 2d 45, 660 N.W.2d 686. 
¶10 We agree with the referee that Attorney Magaña should 
be declared in default.  Attorney Magaña undisputedly received a 
copy of the amended complaint, but failed to appear or present a 
defense despite being given ample opportunity to do so.  He has, 
therefore, defaulted.  We also accept the referee's findings of 
fact based on the allegations of the amended complaint, and 
agree 
with 
the 
referee 
that 
those 
findings 
support 
a 
determination of misconduct on the 74 counts alleged in the 
OLR's complaint. 
¶11 The scope of Attorney Magaña's misconduct——which, 
again, is deemed admitted here——is vast and troubling.  Given 
the volume of uncontested allegations in the OLR's 61-page 
amended complaint, we do not repeat them all here.  It is 
sufficient to provide the following summary.   
No. 
2016AP1385-D   
 
6 
 
¶12 Attorney Magaña practiced immigration law at a law 
firm in the Milwaukee area.  Time and again, Attorney Magaña 
collected flat fees and cost advances from his clients and did 
not perform the work he committed to do.  He would often ignore 
his clients' requests for information about their cases.  When 
he did communicate with his clients, he would supply them with 
false information——including fabricated documents and false case 
numbers——in order to deceive them into believing that their 
cases were progressing on schedule, when in fact they were 
languishing due to Attorney Magaña's inactivity.  Attorney 
Magaña eventually left his employing law firm, but did not tell 
his clients of his departure or take any steps to protect their 
interests upon his departure.  He was uncooperative with the 
OLR's investigation into his conduct.  In April 2014, he pled 
guilty to a charge of misdemeanor operating while intoxicated 
(second offense), and failed to timely report that conviction to 
the OLR and the clerk of this court.     
¶13 The OLR alleged and the referee concluded that this 
string of misdeeds amounted to the following 74 acts of 
professional misconduct: 
 Contrary to SCR 20:1.3,3 Attorney Magaña willfully 
failed to act with diligence and promptness during his 
representation of E.S. (Count 1); M.M.-M. (Count 5); 
A.H. (Count 9); A.G. (Count 13); O.M.G. (Count 16); 
                                                 
3 SCR 20:1.3 provides:  "A lawyer shall act with reasonable 
diligence and promptness in representing a client." 
No. 
2016AP1385-D   
 
7 
 
A.L. (Count 20); M.S. (Count 23); M.R. (Count 25); 
J.B.G. (Count 28); J.F.C. (Count 30); R.A. (Count 35); 
A.A. (Count 39); A.C.C. (Count 42); A.D. (Count 46); 
R.G. (Count 50); F.M. (Count 52); F.R.A. (Count 54); 
C.R. (Count 57); I.R.M. and I.I. (Count 61); I.M. 
(Count 65); M.S. (Count 67); and N.S.M. (Count 71). 
 Contrary to 20:1.4(a)(3),4 and also, in some instances, 
SCR 20:1.4(a)(4),5 Attorney Magaña failed to keep the 
following clients reasonably informed about the status 
of their cases:  E.S. (Count 2); M.M.-M. (Count 6); 
A.H. (Count 10); A.G. (Count 14); O.M.G. (Count 17); 
A.L. (Count 21); M.S. (Count 24); M.R. (Count 26); 
J.B.G. (Count 29); J.F.C. (Count 31); R.A. (Count 36); 
A.A. (Count 40); A.C.C. (Count 43); A.D. (Count 47); 
F.M. (Count 53); F.R.A. (Count 55); C.R. (Count 58); 
I.R.M. and I.I. (Count 62); and M.S. (Count 68). 
 Contrary to SCR 20:1.15(b)(1),6 Attorney Magaña failed 
to hold the filing fees paid by his client, J.F.C., in 
trust (Count 33). 
                                                 
4 SCR 20:1.4(a)(3) provides: "A lawyer shall keep the client 
reasonably informed about the status of the matter." 
5 SCR 20:1.4(a)(4) provides:  "A lawyer shall promptly 
comply with reasonable requests by the client for information." 
6 SCR 20:1.15(b)(1) provides: 
A lawyer shall hold in trust, separate from the 
lawyer's own property, that property of clients and 
3rd parties that is in the lawyer's possession in 
connection with a representation. All funds of clients 
(continued) 
No. 
2016AP1385-D   
 
8 
 
 Contrary to SCR 20:8.4(c),7 Attorney Magaña engaged in 
dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation during 
his representation of E.S. (Count 3); M.M.-M. (Count 
7); A.H. (Count 11); A.G. (Count 15); O.M.G. (Count 
18); M.R. (Count 27); J.F.C. (Counts 32 and 34); R.A. 
(Count 37); A.D. (Count 48); F.R.A. (Count 56); C.R. 
(Count 59); I.R.M. and I.I. (Count 63); and M.S. 
(Count 69). 
 Contrary to SCR 22.03(6)8 and also, in some instances, 
SCR 22.03(2),9 enforced via SCR 20:8.4(h),10 Attorney 
                                                                                                                                                             
and 3rd parties paid to a lawyer or law firm in 
connection with a representation shall be deposited in 
one or more identifiable trust accounts.  
7 SCR 20:8.4(c) provides:  "It is professional misconduct 
for a lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, 
deceit or misrepresentation." 
8 SCR 22.03(6) 
provides: 
"In 
the 
course 
of 
the 
investigation, the respondent's wilful failure to provide 
relevant information, to answer questions fully, or to furnish 
documents and the respondent's misrepresentation in a disclosure 
are misconduct, regardless of the merits of the matters asserted 
in the grievance." 
9 SCR 22.03(2) provides: 
Upon commencing an investigation, the director 
shall notify the respondent of the matter being 
investigated unless in the opinion of the director the 
investigation of the matter requires otherwise.  The 
respondent shall fully and fairly disclose all facts 
and circumstances pertaining to the alleged misconduct 
within 20 days after being served by ordinary mail 
request for a written response.  The director may 
allow additional time to respond.  Following receipt 
of the response, the director may conduct further 
(continued) 
No. 
2016AP1385-D   
 
9 
 
Magaña failed to provide relevant information to the 
OLR in a timely fashion during its investigation into 
his representation of E.S. (Count 4); M.M.-M. (Count 
8); A.H. (Count 12); O.M.G. (Count 19); A.L. (Count 
22); R.A. (Count 38); A.A. (Count 41); A.C.C. (Counts 
44 and 45); A.D. (Count 49); R.G. (Count 51); C.R. 
(Count 60); I.R.M. and I.I. (Count 64); I.M. (Count 
66); M.S. (Count 70); and N.S.M. (Count 72). 
 Contrary to SCR 20:8.4(b)11 and SCR 21.15(5),12 Attorney 
Magaña engaged in conduct leading to his misdemeanor 
                                                                                                                                                             
investigation and may compel the respondent to answer 
questions, 
furnish 
documents, 
and 
present 
any 
information deemed relevant to the investigation.   
10 SCR 20:8.4(h) provides:  "It is professional misconduct 
for a lawyer to fail to cooperate in the investigation of a 
grievance filed with the office of lawyer regulation as required 
by SCR 21.15(4), SCR 22.001(9)(b), SCR 22.03(2), SCR 22.03(6), 
or SCR 22.04(1)." 
11 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." 
12 SCR 21.15(5) provides: 
An attorney found guilty or convicted of any 
crime on or after July 1, 2002, shall notify in 
writing the office of lawyer regulation and the clerk 
of the Supreme Court within 5 days after the finding 
or conviction, whichever first occurs.  The notice 
shall include the identity of the attorney, the date 
of finding or conviction, the offenses, and the 
jurisdiction.  An attorney's failure to notify the 
office of lawyer regulation and the clerk of the 
supreme court of being found guilty of his or her 
conviction is misconduct. 
No. 
2016AP1385-D   
 
10 
 
operating 
while 
intoxicated 
(second 
offense) 
conviction, and then failed to timely report that 
conviction to the OLR and the clerk of this court 
(Counts 73 and 74).   
¶14 Based upon our review of the record, we have no 
difficulty agreeing with the referee's recommendation that 
Attorney Magaña's law license should be revoked.  The undisputed 
facts show a clear pattern of neglect by Attorney Magaña of his 
clients' needs and objectives, of his professional obligations 
as an attorney, and of the basic importance of truthfulness.  No 
sanction short of revocation would be sufficient to protect the 
public, deter other lawyers from similar behavior, and impress 
upon Attorney Magaña the many errors of his ways.  In short, 
Attorney Magaña cannot be entrusted with a law license.  A 
revocation of Attorney Magaña's law license is also consistent 
with other disciplinary cases in which we have revoked an 
attorney's license.  See, e.g., In re Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Kelly, 2012 WI 55, 341 Wis. 2d 104, 814 N.W.2d 844 
(revocation for 51 counts of misconduct for, among other things, 
failing to perform any substantial work on client cases, failing 
to respond to client inquiries, falsely promising clients that 
legal work would be completed shortly, and failing to cooperate 
with the OLR); In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Fadner, 
2007 WI 18, 299 Wis. 2d 54, 727 N.W.2d 20 (revocation for 45 
counts of misconduct for, among other things, failing to draft 
and file papers for clients as promised, failing to respond to 
No. 
2016AP1385-D   
 
11 
 
client inquiries, failing to appear at scheduled court hearings, 
and failing to cooperate with the OLR). 
¶15 We further conclude that full costs are to be imposed 
on Attorney Magaña.  The OLR's requested costs, as of July 14, 
2017, total $4,925.31.  Attorney Magaña has failed to object to 
these requested costs or allege any factors that would justify a 
reduction in them.  He will accordingly bear them in full.  
¶16 As 
to 
the 
issue 
of 
restitution, 
the 
referee 
recommended, consistent with the OLR's request in its amended 
complaint, that this court order Attorney Magaña to pay 
restitution to former client M.S. in the amount of $630; to 
former client J.F.C. in the amount of $420; and to his prior law 
firm in the amount of $420.  We agree with this recommendation.   
¶17 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Sergio Magaña to 
practice law in Wisconsin is revoked, effective the date of this 
order. 
¶18 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Sergio Magaña shall pay 
restitution in the following amounts: 
 $630 to former client M.S.;  
 $420 to former client J.F.C; and 
 $420 to his former law firm.  
¶19 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date 
of this order, Sergio Magaña shall pay to the Office of Lawyer 
Regulation the costs of this proceeding, which are $4,925.31 as 
of July 14, 2017. 
No. 
2016AP1385-D   
 
12 
 
¶20 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the restitution specified 
above is to be completed prior to paying costs to the Office of 
Lawyer Regulation. 
¶21 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent he has not 
already done so, Sergio Magaña shall comply with the provisions 
of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of a person whose license to 
practice law in Wisconsin has been revoked. 
 
 
No. 
2016AP1385-D   
 
 
 
1