Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. P. Nicholas Hurtgen
Citation: 2009 WI 92
Docket Number: 2009AP000941-D
State: Wisconsin
Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Date: September 9, 2009

2009 WI 92 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2009AP941-D 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against P. Nicholas Hurtgen, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
P. Nicholas Hurtgen, 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HURTGEN 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
September 9, 2009   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
        
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING: PROSSER, J., did not participate.   
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
      
 
 
 
 
2009 WI 92
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.  2009AP941-D  
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against P. Nicholas Hurtgen, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
P. Nicholas Hurtgen, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
SEP 9, 2009 
 
David R. Schanker 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY 
disciplinary 
proceeding.   
Attorney's 
license 
revoked.   
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.   Attorney P. Nicholas Hurtgen has filed a 
petition for consensual license revocation pursuant to SCR 
22.19.1   He states he cannot successfully defend against pending 
                                                 
1 SCR 22.19 provides, in pertinent part: 
(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 [of] 
his or her license to practice law.  
No. 
2009AP941-D   
 
2 
 
charges of professional misconduct relating to his conviction, 
entered following a guilty plea, to one count of aiding and 
abetting wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1343, 1346, and 
2 in connection with a long-running federal investigation of 
corruption in the administration of former Illinois Governor Rod 
Blagojevich.  
¶2 
Attorney Hurtgen was admitted to practice law in 
Wisconsin in 1992.  He resides in Illinois and is presently the 
subject of an OLR investigation into these matters. 
¶3 
The facts from the indictment are complicated and will 
be only briefly summarized by this court.  Attorney Hurtgen was 
a senior managing director in the Chicago office of Bear Stearns 
& Co. ("Bear Stearns"), an investment bank that did business 
with Edward Hospital.  In December 2007 Attorney Hurtgen was 
indicted in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of 
Illinois on three counts of mail fraud, three counts of wire 
fraud and one count of extortion in connection with a "pay to 
play" scheme involving medical facility construction projects in 
Illinois.  Two other individuals, Stuart Levine, a member of the 
Illinois Planning Board, and Jacob Kiferbaum, owner and operator 
                                                                                                                                                             
(2) The petition shall state that the petitioner 
cannot successfully defend against the allegations of 
misconduct.  
. . .  
(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. 
2009AP941-D   
 
3 
 
of Kiferbaum Construction, were also indicted in connection with 
the same scheme.  The indictment indicates that Attorney Hurtgen 
sought to arrange the financing of a proposed Plainfield 
hospital and medical center for Edward Hospital. 
¶4 
The indictment alleges that between early 2001 through 
at least June 2004, the three men conspired to defraud Chicago 
Medical School, the Planning Board, and the State of Illinois, 
among others, in connection with four construction projects.  
¶5 
According to the indictment, Levine, Kiferbaum, and 
Attorney Hurtgen agreed they would use Levine's position on the 
Planning Board to try to force Edward Hospital to hire 
Kiferbaum's company to build the proposed $90 million hospital 
and a $23 million medical office building in Plainfield.  The 
plan was to tell Edward Hospital representatives that the 
Planning Board would not approve the projects unless they hired 
Kiferbaum to build the projects.  Attorney Hurtgen assisted in 
the scheme because he wanted his employer, Bear Stearns, to 
receive the financing work for the new Edward Hospital.  
¶6 
According to the indictment, Attorney Hurtgen agreed 
to introduce Kiferbaum to the CEO of Edward Hospital.  Kiferbaum 
understood that Levine would direct the CEO to provide him with 
a kickback.  According to the indictment, in mid-December 2003, 
Attorney Hurtgen called Edward Hospital's CEO and said if the 
hospital wanted to have certain permits approved, it should 
postpone 
its 
application 
before 
the 
Planning 
Board 
on 
December 17, 2003, to allow time to hire Kiferbaum.  Otherwise, 
the permit would be denied.  On December 23, 2003, Attorney 
No. 
2009AP941-D   
 
4 
 
Hurtgen and Kiferbaum met with Edward Hospital's CEO to attempt 
to force the hiring of Kiferbaum's company.  
¶7 
On January 8, 2004, Attorney Hurtgen met again with 
the CEO as well as with Edward Hospital's project administrator.  
When this meeting occurred, the defendants were unaware that the 
hospital 
officials 
were 
cooperating 
with 
the 
FBI. 
 
The 
indictment alleged that in explaining his role in persuading 
Edward Hospital officials to hire Kiferbaum's company, Attorney 
Hurtgen said that Bear Stearns would finance the hospital if it 
was approved.  During the January meeting, the hospital's CEO 
requested proof that the threats and promises were real.  
Attorney Hurtgen said he might be able to arrange a situation in 
which Levine would "inadvertently" bump into the CEO and 
Attorney Hurtgen.  After further discussions, Levine and 
Attorney Hurtgen went to a restaurant in Deerfield, Illinois, on 
April 18, 2004, to prove to the CEO that Levine, Attorney 
Hurtgen, and Kiferbaum were working together and that their 
threats and promises were real.  Levine and Attorney Hurtgen 
walked over to the table where Kiferbaum and the CEO were 
sitting and spoke with them about hiring Kiferbaum.  Attorney 
Hurtgen later said he told the CEO that it was "all about money" 
for campaign contributions. 
¶8 
As of the April 21, 2004, Planning Board meeting, 
Edward Hospital had not hired Kiferbaum.  Levine voted against 
the project and the Plainfield hospital application was denied.   
¶9 
Attorney Hurtgen eventually reached a plea agreement 
whereby he promised to cooperate with the investigation in 
No. 
2009AP941-D   
 
5 
 
return for a recommendation of a lighter sentence.  He entered a 
guilty plea on February 25, 2009.   
¶10 Attorney Hurtgen is a Wisconsin-licensed attorney who 
engaged in felonious behavior by participating in a pay-to-play 
scheme.  Admittedly, Attorney Hurtgen was not acting as an 
attorney when he engaged in this scheme, but his participation 
in this scheme reflects serious misconduct that violates the 
public trust.   The OLR recommends revocation as the appropriate 
sanction, 
and 
Attorney 
Hurtgen 
does 
not 
oppose 
this 
recommendation.  He acknowledges he cannot successfully defend 
against the allegations of the pending disciplinary proceeding.  
He states that he is freely, voluntarily, and knowingly filing 
the petition for consensual license revocation.  He notes that 
he is represented by counsel, and states that he knows he is 
giving up his right to contest the allegations of misconduct. 
¶11 Therefore, we accept Attorney Hurtgen's petition for 
consensual license revocation, and we revoke Attorney Hurtgen's 
license to practice law in Wisconsin.  
¶12 IT IS ORDERED that the license of P. Nicholas Hurtgen 
to practice law in Wisconsin is revoked, effective the date of 
this order. 
¶13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent he has not 
already done so, P. Nicholas Hurtgen shall comply with the 
provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of an attorney 
whose license to practice law has been revoked. 
¶14 DAVID T. PROSSER, J., did not participate. 
 
No. 
2009AP941-D   
 
 
 
1