Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Perry H. Friesler
Citation: 2013 WI 104
Docket Number: 2013AP001685-D
State: Wisconsin
Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Date: December 26, 2013

2013 WI 104 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2013AP1685-D   
COMPLETE TITLE: 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings  
Against Perry H. Friesler, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
Perry H. Friesler, 
          Respondent.   
 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST Friesler  
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
December 26, 2013 
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
      
 
JUDGE: 
      
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
ABRAHAMSON, C.J., concurs. (Opinion filed.)   
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:         
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2013 WI 104
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.   2013AP1685-D 
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings  
Against Perry H. Friesler, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Perry H. Friesler, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
DEC 26, 2013 
 
Diane M. Fremgen 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY 
disciplinary 
proceeding.   Attorney's 
license 
revoked.   
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.   Attorney Perry H. Friesler has filed a 
petition for the consensual revocation of his license to 
practice law in Wisconsin pursuant to SCR 22.19.1  Attorney 
                                                 
1 SCR 22.19 provides 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. 
2013AP1685-D   
 
2 
 
Friesler states in his petition that he cannot successfully 
defend against multiple allegations of misconduct in connection 
with two grievances that the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) 
is currently investigating.   
¶2 
Attorney Friesler was admitted to the practice of law 
in 1968.  His license is currently suspended for nonpayment of 
dues and failure to comply with trust account certification 
requirements. 
                                                                                                                                                             
 
(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. 
2013AP1685-D   
 
3 
 
¶3 
Attached 
to 
Attorney 
Friesler's 
petition 
for 
revocation is a summary of misconduct allegations in two matters 
that have not yet been fully investigated by the OLR.  Both 
matters involved Attorney Friesler allegedly misappropriating 
funds belonging to an estate in which he served as personal 
representative and attorney.  In one estate matter in Ozaukee 
County, the Estate of H.A.L., Attorney Friesler is alleged to 
have misappropriated $72,500 in estate funds.  In another estate 
matter in Milwaukee County, the Estate of L.P., Attorney 
Friesler is alleged to have misappropriated approximately 
$105,250 in estate funds, although Attorney Friesler claims this 
amount should be offset by $17,860, the amount he invoiced the 
estate for fees.  The OLR states that it is investigating claims 
that in both estate matters, Attorney Friesler engaged in 
misconduct involving dishonesty, deceit, or misrepresentation; 
committed trust account violations; and failed to act with 
reasonable diligence and promptness in representing his clients.  
See SCRs 20:8.4(c), 20:1.15(b) and (d), and 20:1.3. 
¶4 
Attorney Friesler's petition for consensual revocation 
states that he cannot successfully defend himself against the 
allegations of professional misconduct set forth in the OLR's 
summary of the matters being investigated.  His petition asserts 
that he is seeking consensual revocation freely, voluntarily, 
and knowingly.  Attorney Friesler states that he understands he 
is giving up his right to contest the OLR's allegations.  
Attorney Friesler is represented by counsel in this disciplinary 
matter.  
No. 
2013AP1685-D   
 
4 
 
¶5 
The OLR has filed a recommendation on Attorney 
Friesler's petition for consensual license revocation.  See 
SCR 22.19(3).  The OLR states that revocation is warranted and 
necessary.  The OLR's recommendation also contains a restitution 
request.  The OLR states that Attorney Friesler should be 
ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $72,500 to the State 
Bar of Wisconsin Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection (the Fund), 
which has approved and paid a $72,500 reimbursement application 
filed by successor counsel for the Estate of H.A.L.  Regarding 
the Estate of L.P., the OLR states that Attorney Friesler should 
be ordered to pay restitution to the estate in the amount of 
$105,250, less any offset for Attorney Friesler's fees which are 
determined to be properly chargeable to the estate.  As stated 
above, Attorney Friesler claims entitlement to $17,860 in fees 
for his work on the Estate of L.P.   
¶6 
Having reviewed Attorney Friesler's petition, the 
OLR's summary of the matters it is investigating, and the OLR's 
recommendation on Attorney Friesler's petition, we accept 
Attorney Friesler's petition for the revocation of his license 
to practice law in Wisconsin.  See SCRs 22.19(1), (2), and (5). 
The seriousness of Attorney Friesler's misconduct demonstrates 
the need to revoke his law license to protect the public, the 
courts, and the legal system from the repetition of misconduct; 
to impress upon Attorney Friesler the seriousness of his 
misconduct; and to deter other attorneys from engaging in 
similar misconduct.  See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against 
Arthur, 2005 WI 40, ¶78, 279 Wis. 2d 583, 694 N.W.2d 910. 
No. 
2013AP1685-D   
 
5 
 
¶7 
Concerning restitution, we determine that Attorney 
Friesler should be required to pay $72,500 to the Fund in 
connection with the losses caused by his actions as personal 
representative of the Estate of H.A.L.  We further determine 
that Attorney Friesler should be required to pay restitution to 
the Estate of L.P. in the minimum amount of $87,390.  We direct 
the OLR and Attorney Friesler to confer and attempt to reach a 
stipulation within 30 days from the date of this order as to 
what amount of Attorney Friesler's $17,860 fee claim is properly 
chargeable to the Estate of L.P.  If a stipulation cannot be 
reached, we order that as a condition of reinstatement of 
Attorney Friesler's license, Attorney Friesler shall furnish a 
complete accounting and prove that he has settled all claims 
related to the $17,860 potentially owed to the Estate of L.P.  
See SCR 22.29(4m) (a lawyer petitioning for reinstatement must 
prove that he or she has made restitution to or settled all 
claims of persons harmed by the lawyer's misconduct, or must 
explain the failure or inability to do so); see also In re 
Disciplinary Proceedings Against Mularski, 2010 WI 113, ¶¶35, 
37, 329 Wis. 2d 273, 787 N.W.2d 834 (revoking attorney's license 
and requiring attorney to show he made full restitution to his 
clients at such time as he would seek reinstatement). 
¶8 
Because 
Attorney 
Friesler 
petitioned 
for 
the 
consensual revocation of his Wisconsin law license before the 
appointment of a referee, and because the OLR has not requested 
the imposition of costs, we do not assess the costs of this 
disciplinary proceeding against Attorney Friesler.   
No. 
2013AP1685-D   
 
6 
 
¶9 
IT IS ORDERED that the petition for consensual license 
revocation is granted. 
¶10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the license of Perry H. 
Friesler to practice law in Wisconsin is revoked, effective the 
date of this order. 
¶11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date 
of this order Perry H. Friesler shall pay restitution in the 
amount of $72,500 to the Wisconsin Lawyers' Fund for Client 
Protection and in the amount of $87,390 to the Estate of L.P.  
¶12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Office of Lawyer 
Regulation and Perry H. Friesler shall confer and attempt to 
reach a stipulation within 30 days from the date of this order 
as to what amount of Perry H. Friesler's $17,860 fee claim is 
properly chargeable to the Estate of L.P.  If a stipulation 
cannot be reached, we order that as a condition of reinstatement 
of Perry H. Friesler's license, Perry H. Friesler shall furnish 
a complete accounting and prove that he has settled all claims 
related to the $17,860 potentially owed to the Estate of L.P.   
¶13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent he has not 
already done so, Perry H. Friesler 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.  2013AP1685.ssa 
 
1 
 
 
¶14 SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, C.J.   (concurring).  The court 
has not been advised whether any criminal prosecution has been 
undertaken.  
 
 
No.  2013AP1685.ssa 
 
 
 
1