Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Terrence J. Woods
Citation: 2009 WI 7
Docket Number: 2008AP000544-D
State: Wisconsin
Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Date: January 21, 2009

2009 WI 7 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2008AP544-D 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings  
Against Terrence J. Woods, Attorney at Law: 
 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
Terrence J. Woods, 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST WOODS 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
January 21, 2009   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
        
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:         
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
      
 
 
 
 
2009 WI 7
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.  2008AP544-D  
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings  
Against Terrence J. Woods, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Terrence J. Woods, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
JAN 21, 2009 
 
David R. Schanker 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY 
disciplinary 
proceeding.   Attorney's 
license 
suspended.   
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.   On March 5, 2008, the Office of Lawyer 
Regulation (OLR) filed a complaint alleging Attorney Terrence J. 
Woods committed six counts of professional misconduct in 
connection with representing a client in a personal injury 
lawsuit and for failure to file and/or pay certain state income 
taxes.  The parties executed a joint stipulation, so we consider 
the OLR complaint and the parties' stipulation without the 
No. 
2008AP544-D   
 
2 
 
appointment of a referee pursuant to SCR 22.12(1).1  After 
careful consideration, we adopt the stipulation of the parties 
and agree that the seriousness of Attorney Woods' misconduct 
warrants the suspension of his license to practice law in 
Wisconsin for a period of one year to run consecutive to his 
current suspension imposed by this court in July 2008.  We 
further agree that Attorney Woods should not be required to pay 
the costs of this proceeding. 
¶2 
Attorney Woods was admitted to practice law in 
Wisconsin in 1965.  Attorney Woods' license to practice law in 
Wisconsin is currently suspended and he has been disciplined by 
this court on several previous occasions.  
¶3 
In 1993 Attorney Woods received a public reprimand for 
failing to properly pursue an appeal on behalf of two criminal 
defendants.  See Public Reprimand of Terrence J. Woods, 1993-2.   
¶4 
In 
1996 
Attorney 
Woods 
consented 
to 
a 
private 
reprimand for settling a case without his client's knowledge or 
consent and for refusing to return documents and property 
belonging to his client.  See Private Reprimand of Terrence J. 
Woods, 1996-1.   
                                                 
1 SCR 22.12 provides:  Stipulation. 
(1)  The director may file with the complaint a 
stipulation of the director and the respondent to the 
facts, conclusions of law regarding misconduct, and 
discipline to be imposed.  The supreme court may 
consider the complaint and stipulation without the 
appointment of a referee.   
No. 
2008AP544-D   
 
3 
 
¶5 
In 1998 this court suspended Attorney Woods for 60 
days for misconduct that included failure to keep his clients 
informed of the status of their matters, failure to return 
property, failure to act with reasonable diligence in pursuing 
his clients' interests, failure to communicate with his clients, 
and 
failure 
to 
cooperate 
with 
the 
Board 
of 
Attorneys 
Professional Responsibility's investigation into his misconduct.  
See 
In 
re 
Disciplinary 
Proceedings 
Against 
Woods, 
216 
Wis. 2d 137, 573 N.W.2d 838 (1998).  
¶6 
Later in 1998 Attorney Woods was again suspended for 
60 days for failure to act diligently on his client's behalf and 
failure to properly inform his client of the status of the case.  
See 
In 
re 
Disciplinary 
Proceedings 
Against 
Woods, 
221 
Wis. 2d 230, 583 N.W.2d 650 (1998).   
¶7 
In 2003 Attorney Woods received a public reprimand for 
misconduct committed in connection with a possible small claims 
action over unpaid vacation compensation and for failure to 
inform his client 
that he would not pursue a worker's 
compensation claim on her behalf after leading her to believe 
that he would pursue the claim.  See Public Reprimand of 
Terrence J. Woods, 2003-11.  
¶8 
Most recently, in July 2008, this court suspended 
Attorney Woods' license to practice law for 90 days for 
professional misconduct committed in the context of a bankruptcy 
proceeding and a divorce proceeding.  OLR v. Woods, 2008 WI 79, 
311 Wis. 2d 213, 751 N.W.2d 840.  Again, his license remains 
suspended. 
No. 
2008AP544-D   
 
4 
 
¶9 
The present disciplinary matter involves misconduct 
committed in the context of representing a client in a fee 
dispute and misconduct relating to Attorney Woods' own failure 
to file and/or pay state income taxes.   
IN THE MATTER OF D.B. 
¶10 In 2001 D.B. was involved in an automobile accident.  
In November 2002 D.B. and her husband contacted Attorney Woods 
because their insurance company had declined to pay D.B.'s 
chiropractor bills.  Attorney Woods agreed to represent D.B., 
and D.B. signed a contingent fee agreement with Attorney Woods.   
¶11 Attorney Woods did not file a lawsuit on behalf of 
D.B. until one day before the applicable statute of limitations 
expired.  Then, Attorney Woods failed to serve the defendants 
with an authenticated copy of the summons and complaint as 
required by Wis. Stat. § 801.02(2).  Accordingly, the circuit 
court scheduled a hearing to dismiss the lawsuit on January 11, 
2005.  Attorney Woods failed to advise D.B. of this hearing.  
Attorney Woods attended the dismissal hearing, and the lawsuit 
was dismissed with prejudice on January 11, 2005, because of 
Attorney Woods' failure to serve an authenticated copy of the 
summons and complaint.  Attorney Woods failed to notify D.B. 
that her case was dismissed.  Several times after the January 
11, 2005, hearing, D.B. spoke with Attorney Woods about her 
lawsuit, and each time Attorney Woods told her that her case was 
proceeding normally.   
¶12 D.B.'s father died in the fall of 2006.  At that time, 
she learned that Attorney Woods was handling her father's 
No. 
2008AP544-D   
 
5 
 
estate.  D.B. spoke with Attorney Woods several times about her 
personal injury lawsuit as well as her father's estate.  At no 
time did Attorney Woods inform D.B. that her lawsuit had been 
dismissed.   
¶13 In November 2006 D.B. informed Attorney Woods that she 
had learned her lawsuit had been dismissed.  She attempted to 
arrange a meeting with Attorney Woods to discuss the matter, but 
Attorney Woods failed to appear at the meeting.   
¶14 In January 2007 D.B. retained Attorney Brian Maloney 
to pursue a legal malpractice action against Attorney Woods.  
Attorney Maloney requested D.B.'s file but Attorney Woods failed 
to respond to these requests and did not make D.B.'s file 
available until he was deposed in June 2007.   
¶15 Based on the foregoing, the OLR complaint alleged and 
the parties later stipulated as follows: 
By failing to file a personal injury lawsuit 
until the day before the expiration of the statute of 
limitations and, in addition, in failing to serve the 
defendants in such lawsuit with an authenticated copy 
of the summons and complaint within 90 days after 
filing, resulting in the dismissal of the lawsuit with 
prejudice, 
Attorney 
Woods 
failed 
to 
act 
with 
reasonable diligence and promptness in representing 
his clients, in violation of SCR 20:1.3.2   
                                                 
2 Effective July 1, 2007, substantial changes were made to 
the Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules of Professional Conduct for 
Attorneys, SCR Chapter 20.  See S. Ct. Order 04-07, 2007 WI 4, 
293 Wis. 2d xv, 726 N.W.2d Ct.R-45 (eff. July 1, 2007); and 
S. Ct. 
Order 
06-04, 
2007 
WI 
48, 
297 
Wis. 2d xv, 
730 
N.W.2d Ct.R.-29 (eff. July 1, 2007).  Because the conduct 
underlying this case arose prior to July 1, 2007, unless 
otherwise indicated, all references to the supreme court rules 
will be to those in effect prior to July 1, 2007. 
No. 
2008AP544-D   
 
6 
 
By failing to inform D.B. that the defendants had 
filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, and that the 
court had scheduled a hearing on defendants' motion to 
dismiss and, in addition, by failing to inform D.B. of 
the 
court's 
order 
dismissing 
the 
lawsuit 
with 
prejudice, Attorney Woods failed to keep his clients 
reasonably informed about the status of their case, in 
violation of former SCR 20:1.4(a).3 
By failing to explain to D.B. the ramifications 
of the dismissal of the lawsuit with prejudice at any 
time from January 11, 2005, through November 29, 2006, 
Attorney Woods deprived his client of the ability to 
make informed decisions regarding the representation 
and thereby violated SCR 20:1.4(b).4 
By failing to respond to successor counsel's 
requests for D.B.'s file, Attorney Woods failed to 
take steps to protect his clients' interests, such as 
surrendering 
their 
file, 
in 
violation 
of 
SCR 
20:1.16(d).5 
By failing to inform D.B. of the dismissal of the 
lawsuit, notwithstanding multiple direct inquiries to 
                                                                                                                                                             
Former SCR 20:1.3 provides "[a] lawyer shall act with 
reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client." 
3 Former SCR 20:1.4(a) states "[a] lawyer shall keep a 
client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and 
promptly comply with reasonable requests for information." 
4 Former SCR 20:1.4(b) states, "A lawyer shall explain a 
matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client 
to make informed decisions regarding the representation." 
5 Former SCR 20:1.16(d) provides: 
 
Upon termination of representation, a lawyer 
shall take steps to the extent reasonably practicable 
to protect a client's interests, such as giving 
reasonable notice to the client, allowing time for 
employment of other counsel, surrendering papers and 
property to which the client is entitled and refunding 
any advance payment of fee that has not been earned.  
The lawyer may retain papers relating to the client to 
the extent permitted by other law.  
No. 
2008AP544-D   
 
7 
 
Attorney Woods concerning the status of their case 
made after the dismissal with prejudice of the suit, 
Attorney Woods violated SCR 20:8.4(c).6 
STATE INCOME TAX MATTERS 
¶16 In August 2007 the Department of Revenue (DOR) advised 
the OLR that Attorney Woods had failed to file state income tax 
returns and owed delinquent state income tax, state withholding 
tax, and state business tax registration fees to the DOR.  
Initially, the DOR advised the OLR that Attorney Woods' 
estimated tax liability totaled $430,338.80.   
¶17 Attorney Woods responded to the OLR inquiry regarding 
the alleged income tax liabilities denying that he owed 
$430,338.80, but admitting that he had been working with an 
accountant to address his state withholding tax issue and his 
tax liability.  In November 2007 the DOR reported to the OLR 
that Attorney Woods' tax liability was $208,478.76.   
¶18 Based on the foregoing, the OLR alleged and the 
parties later stipulated that Attorney Woods violated SCR 
20:8.4(f)7 by: 
Failing to file Wisconsin state income tax returns 
with the Department of Revenue for the tax period(s) 
1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2004, 2005, and 2006. 
                                                 
6 Former 
SCR 
20:8.4(c) 
provides 
it 
is 
professional 
misconduct for a lawyer to "engage in conduct involving 
dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation." 
7 SCR 20:8.4(f) states it is professional misconduct for a 
lawyer to "violate a statute, supreme court rule, supreme court 
order or supreme court decision regulating the conduct of 
lawyers." 
No. 
2008AP544-D   
 
8 
 
Failing to pay income taxes to the Department of 
Revenue for the tax years 1996, 1997, 1998, and 1999. 
Failing to pay withholding taxes for the tax years 
1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, May through December 2001, 
2002, September through December 2003, and June 2004.  
Failing to file withholding tax returns for 1997, 
2004, 2005, 2006, and for January through June 2007. 
Failing to pay business tax registration fees for 
1999, 2001, 2003, and 2005. 
Failing to satisfy tax warrants issued against him by 
the Department of Revenue for the years 1998 through 
2007.   
¶19 As part of the stipulation, Attorney Woods admitted he 
owes monies to the DOR, but contends the amount he owes is 
substantially less than what DOR claims.  
¶20 Attorney Woods acknowledged that the stipulation was 
made knowingly and voluntarily and represents his admission of 
the misconduct charged in the disciplinary complaint and his 
assent to the level of discipline sought by the OLR.   
¶21 With respect to the appropriate level of discipline, 
the parties agreed that a one-year suspension was appropriate 
and that the suspension should be imposed consecutive to 
Attorney Woods' current suspension imposed in July 2008.  The 
OLR explicitly advised the court that the recommended discipline 
was not the result of negotiations. 
¶22 SCR 22.12(2) provides that if this court approves a 
stipulation, it shall adopt the stipulated facts and conclusions 
of law and impose the stipulated discipline.  SCR 22.12(3) 
provides that if this court rejects the stipulation, a referee 
No. 
2008AP544-D   
 
9 
 
will be appointed and the matter shall proceed as a complaint 
filed without a stipulation.   
¶23 We adopt the stipulated facts and conclusions of law.  
We now turn to the recommended discipline.   
¶24 Attorney Woods has an extensive disciplinary history.  
Attorney Woods' misconduct in this matter seriously compromised 
the legal rights of his client, D.B.  Upon review of the 
stipulation, this court questioned whether the proposed one-year 
suspension was inadequate under the circumstances, particularly 
given 
Attorney 
Woods' 
extensive 
disciplinary 
history.  
Accordingly, this court issued an order directing the parties to 
justify the recommendation for discipline contained in the 
parties' stipulation. 
¶25 Both parties filed written responses.  The OLR 
provided this court with a 14-page detailed memorandum which 
analyzed some 11 disciplinary cases involving neglect of client 
matters.  The OLR advised the court that typically, the 
misconduct alleged in this complaint would warrant a suspension 
in the range of 60 to 90 days.  The OLR also analyzed nine 
disciplinary cases involving failure to file income tax returns 
or 
pay 
income 
tax 
liabilities. 
 
Absent 
his 
extensive 
disciplinary history, Attorney Woods' misconduct in this matter 
would likely warrant a suspension of his license to practice law 
in Wisconsin for a period of 90 days to six months.  Here, 
however, the OLR was mindful that Attorney Woods' previous 
disciplinary 
history 
is 
a 
significant 
aggravating 
factor 
justifying a more lengthy suspension.  
No. 
2008AP544-D   
 
10 
 
¶26 Upon review of the OLR's statement in support of the 
stipulation, this court is persuaded that a one-year suspension 
of Attorney Woods' license to practice law in Wisconsin——imposed 
consecutive to his current suspension——is adequate discipline 
for the misconduct committed in this matter.  Therefore, 
¶27 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Terrence J. Woods to 
practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period of one year, 
effective the date of this order.  The suspension shall run 
consecutive to the 90-day suspension imposed by this court in 
OLR v. Woods, 2008 WI 79, 311 Wis. 2d 213, 751 N.W.2d 840. 
¶28 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Terrence J. Woods shall 
comply with the requirements of SCR 22.26 pertaining to 
activities following suspension if he has not already done so. 
 
No. 
2008AP544-D   
 
 
 
1