Title: Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility v. Gerald M. Schwartz
Citation: 2005 WI 158
Docket Number: 1994AP002565-D
State: Wisconsin
Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Date: November 23, 2005

2005 WI 158 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
1991AP21-D & 1994AP2565-D 
 
 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Gerald M. Schwartz, Attorney at Law: 
 
 
Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility 
n/k/a Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
Gerald M. Schwartz, 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST SCHWARTZ 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
November 23, 2005   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
        
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:         
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
      
 
 
2005 WI 158
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
Nos.  1991AP21-D & 1994AP2565-D 
 
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Gerald M. Schwartz, Attorney at Law: 
 
Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility 
n/k/a Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Gerald M. Schwartz, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
NOV 23, 2005 
 
Cornelia G. Clark 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY reinstatement proceeding.  Reinstatement granted 
upon conditions.   
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.   We review the recommendation of the 
referee that Gerald M. Schwartz's license to practice law in 
Wisconsin be reinstated upon certain conditions.  We adopt the 
referee's findings of fact and conclusions of law and agree with 
his recommendation that Gerald M. Schwartz's license to practice 
law be reinstated.  We also agree with the referee that it is 
appropriate to impose certain conditions upon the reinstatement. 
Nos. 1991AP21-D & 1994AP2565-D   
 
2 
 
In addition, we find it appropriate that Attorney Schwartz pay 
the costs 
of 
the 
reinstatement proceeding. 
 
See 
In re 
Disciplinary Proceedings Against Penn, 2002 WI 5, 249 Wis. 2d 
667, 638 N.W.2d 287. 
¶2 
Attorney Schwartz was admitted to practice law in 
Wisconsin in 1979.  In 1986 the Wisconsin Supreme Court 
suspended his license to practice law for 90 days for misconduct 
committed in the course of his representation of a client in a 
personal injury action.  In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against 
Schwartz, 134 Wis. 2d 18, 397 N.W.2d 98 (1986).  In 1992 
Attorney Schwartz was administratively suspended for failure to 
comply with Board of Bar Examiners (BBE) continuing legal 
education requirements.  In 1993 this court suspended his 
license for 60 days as discipline for misconduct in another 
personal injury action.  In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against 
Schwartz, 174 Wis. 2d 312, 496 N.W.2d 605 (1993).  In 1995 
Attorney Schwartz's license to practice law in Wisconsin was 
suspended for 18 months, again for professional misconduct.  In 
re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Schwartz, 193 Wis. 2d 157, 
532 
N.W.2d 
450 
(1995). 
 
Generally, 
Attorney 
Schwartz's 
misconduct consisted of various forms of neglect of his clients 
and client matters.   
¶3 
Attorney Schwartz petitioned for reinstatement of his 
license to practice law in November 2004.  Following a hearing 
in May 2005 the referee issued a report recommending that the 
petition for reinstatement be granted, with conditions.  The 
Nos. 1991AP21-D & 1994AP2565-D   
 
3 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) supports reinstatement upon 
conditions and no appeal from this recommendation was filed. 
¶4 
SCR 22.31(1)1 provides the standard to be met for 
reinstatement.  A petitioner must show by clear, satisfactory, 
and convincing evidence that he or she has the moral character 
to practice law, that his or her resumption of the practice of 
law will not be detrimental to the administration of justice or 
subversive of the public interest, and that he or she has 
complied with SCR 22.26 and the terms of the suspension.  In 
addition, SCR 22.29(4)2 states related requirements that a 
                                                 
1 SCR 22.31(1) provides that the petitioner has the burden 
of 
demonstrating, 
by 
clear, 
satisfactory, 
and 
convincing 
evidence, all of the following: 
(a) That he or she has the moral character to 
practice law in Wisconsin. 
(b) That his or her resumption of the practice 
of law will not be detrimental to the administration 
of justice or subversive of the public interest. 
(c) That his or her representations in the 
petition, including the representations required by 
SCR 
22.29(4)(a) 
to 
([4]m) 
and 
22.29(5), 
are 
substantiated. 
(d) That he or she has complied fully with the 
terms of the order of suspension or revocation and 
with the requirements of SCR 22.26. 
2 SCR 22.29(4) provides that the petition for reinstatement 
shall show all of the following: 
(a) The 
petitioner 
desires 
to 
have 
the 
petitioner's license reinstated. 
(b) The petitioner has not practiced law during 
the period of suspension or revocation. 
Nos. 1991AP21-D & 1994AP2565-D   
 
4 
 
petition for reinstatement must show.  All of these additional 
requirements are effectively incorporated into SCR 22.31(1).  
                                                                                                                                                             
(c) The petitioner has complied fully with the 
terms of the order of suspension or revocation and 
will 
continue 
to 
comply 
with 
them 
until 
the 
petitioner's license is reinstated. 
(d) The petitioner has maintained competence and 
learning in the law by attendance at identified 
educational activities. 
 
(e) The 
petitioner's 
conduct 
since 
the 
suspension or revocation has been exemplary and above 
reproach. 
 
(f) The petitioner has a proper understanding of 
and attitude toward the standards that are imposed 
upon members of the bar and will act in conformity 
with the standards. 
(g) The petitioner can safely be recommended to 
the legal profession, the courts and the public as a 
person fit to be consulted by others and to represent 
them and otherwise act in matters of trust and 
confidence and in general to aid in the administration 
of justice as a member of the bar and as an officer of 
the courts. 
(h) The petitioner has fully complied with the 
requirements set forth in SCR 22.26. 
(j) The petitioner's proposed use of the license 
if reinstated. 
(k) A 
full 
description 
of 
all 
of 
the 
petitioner's business activities during the period of 
suspension or revocation. 
(4m) The petitioner has made restitution to or 
settled all claims of persons injured or harmed by 
petitioner's misconduct, including reimbursement to 
the Wisconsin lawyers' fund for client protection for 
all payments made from that fund, or, if not, the 
petitioner's explanation of the failure or inability 
to do so. 
Nos. 1991AP21-D & 1994AP2565-D   
 
5 
 
¶5 
Here, the referee concluded that Attorney Schwartz met 
all of the criteria for reinstatement and met his burden of 
demonstrating that his license to practice law in Wisconsin 
should be reinstated, subject to certain conditions relating to 
a medical condition for which he is receiving treatment.  We 
have reviewed the record and agree with this conclusion and 
recommendation. 
¶6 
Attorney Schwartz's physician testified that it is his 
medical opinion that Attorney Schwartz's reinstatement poses no 
danger to the public and would not be detrimental to the public 
interest.  He indicated that he is available to provide periodic 
reports to the OLR concerning Attorney Schwartz's medical 
condition.  He further testified that Attorney Schwartz is 
remorseful for his prior actions.   
¶7 
The referee found that Attorney Schwartz has made 
restitution to all persons injured or harmed by his misconduct 
in accordance with orders of the court.  He has settled and 
satisfied all costs of the disciplinary proceedings brought 
against him, and has maintained competence and learning by 
attendance 
at 
91 
hours 
of 
BBE-approved 
continuing 
legal 
education programming, including 15 hours of EPR ethics credits, 
since May 5, 2004.  The BBE supports his reinstatement. 
¶8 
Attorney 
Schwartz 
indicates 
that 
he 
intends 
to 
practice in the area of landlord-tenant rights, employment law 
and general business law upon reinstatement of his license to 
practice law.  He testified that he would not practice as a sole 
practitioner if he were reinstated. 
Nos. 1991AP21-D & 1994AP2565-D   
 
6 
 
¶9 
Attorney 
Schwartz 
produced 
witnesses 
who 
also 
testified in support of his character, describing him as 
"honest, reliable, and professional." 
¶10 Following the hearing, the referee concluded that 
Attorney Schwartz had demonstrated by clear, satisfactory, and 
convincing evidence the requirements for reinstatement set forth 
in SCR 22.29(4).  Specifically, he found that: 
1. 
[Attorney Schwartz] has the moral character 
to practice law in Wisconsin. 
2. 
His resumption of [the] practice of law will 
not be detrimental to the administration of justice or 
subversive [] of the public interest. 
3. 
His representations in the Petition for 
Reinstatement, including representations required by 
SCR 
22.29(4)(a) 
to 
([4]m) 
and 
22.29(5) 
are 
substantiated. 
4. 
He has complied with the terms of the orders 
of suspension and with the requirements of SCR 22.26. 
¶11 After an independent review of the record we conclude 
that Attorney Schwartz has established by clear, satisfactory, 
and convincing evidence that he has satisfied all the criteria 
for reinstatement.  Accordingly, we adopt the referee's findings 
of fact and conclusions of law.  We agree with the referee's 
recommendation that Attorney Schwartz's license to practice law 
in Wisconsin be reinstated, subject to the conditions imposed 
herein, requiring him to submit annual medical reports to the 
OLR for a period of two years.  We conclude that these reports 
should be sufficient to enable the OLR to monitor Attorney 
Schwartz's practice of law in the unlikely event that a 
Nos. 1991AP21-D & 1994AP2565-D   
 
7 
 
recurrence of his medical condition occurs.  Finally, we direct 
Attorney Schwartz to pay the costs of this reinstatement 
proceeding, which presently total $3688.13. 
¶12 IT IS ORDERED that the petition for reinstatement of 
the license of Gerald M. Schwartz to practice law in Wisconsin 
is granted, effective the date of this order. 
¶13 IT 
IS 
FURTHER 
ORDERED 
that 
as 
a 
condition 
of 
reinstatement, 
for 
a 
period 
of 
two 
years 
following 
his 
reinstatement Gerald M. Schwartz shall submit annual medical 
reports to the Office of Lawyer Regulation. 
¶14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date 
of this order Gerald M. Schwartz shall pay to the Office of 
Lawyer Regulation the costs of this proceeding.  If the costs 
are not paid within the time specified and absent a showing to 
this court of his inability to pay the costs within that time 
the license of Gerald M. Schwartz to practice law in Wisconsin 
shall be suspended until further order of the court. 
 
Nos. 1991AP21-D & 1994AP2565-D   
 
 
 
1