Title: Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility v. Thomas E. Zablocki
Citation: 2001 WI 115
Docket Number: 2000AP000818-D
State: Wisconsin
Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Date: October 30, 2001

2001 WI 115 
 
 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
00-0818-D 
 
 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Thomas E. Zablocki, Attorney at Law. 
 
Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility,  
 
Complainant, 
 
v. 
Thomas E. Zablocki,  
 
Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ZABLOCKI 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
October 30, 2001   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
        
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:         
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
      
 
 
2001 WI 115 
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The 
final version will appear in the 
bound volume of the official 
reports.   
No.  00-0818-D  
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Thomas E. Zablocki, Attorney at  
Law. 
 
Board of Attorneys Professional  
Responsibility,  
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Thomas E. Zablocki,  
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
OCT 30, 2001  
 
Cornelia G. Clark 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY 
disciplinary 
proceeding.  Attorney 
publicly 
reprimanded. 
¶1 
PER CURIAM   Thomas E. Zablocki was admitted to the 
practice of law in Wisconsin in 1968 and resides in Greendale, 
Wisconsin.  In 1995 Mr. Zablocki consented to a private 
reprimand 
from 
the 
Board 
of 
Attorneys 
Professional 
Responsibility (Board).1  On June 24, 1998, this court suspended 
                                                 
1 Effective 
October 
1, 
2000, 
Wisconsin's 
attorney 
disciplinary process underwent a substantial restructuring.  The 
name of the body responsible for investigating and prosecuting 
cases involving attorney misconduct was changed to the Office of 
Lawyer Regulation (OLR) and the supreme court rules applicable 
to the lawyer regulation system were also revised.  Since the 
No. 
00-0818-D   
 
2 
 
Mr. Zablocki’s license to practice law in Wisconsin for six 
months, effective August 10, 1998, for various violations, 
including failure to maintain a client trust account, depositing 
client funds into personal checking accounts, diverting client 
funds for his own purposes, and failing to cooperate with the 
Board's investigation.  See Disciplinary Proceedings Against 
Zablocki, 219 Wis. 2d 313, 579 N.W.2d 233 (1998).  Mr. 
Zablocki’s license remains suspended. 
¶2 
On March 21, 2000, the Board filed a complaint against 
Mr. Zablocki alleging professional misconduct in the course of 
his representation of a couple involved in a divorce proceeding.  
In May 1997 the wife had retained Mr. Zablocki to represent her 
in a contemplated divorce from her husband.  The wife paid him 
$750.  Mr. Zablocki commenced the divorce action in Milwaukee 
County Circuit Court on May 12, 1997.  While the divorce was 
pending, the couple considered filing for bankruptcy.  In the 
spring of 1998 they consulted with Mr. Zablocki, and he advised 
them it would be cheaper and easier if he were to represent them 
both in the bankruptcy proceedings.  The couple decided to 
retain Mr. Zablocki to handle the bankruptcy case.  The wife 
paid Mr. Zablocki $400 plus half of the filing fee, and the 
husband paid Mr. Zablocki at least $400. 
                                                                                                                                                             
conduct giving rise to the complaint occurred prior to October 
1, 2000, the investigative body will be referred to as "the 
Board."  References to supreme court rules will be to those in 
effect prior to October 1, 2000.  
 
No. 
00-0818-D   
 
3 
 
¶3 
Despite his imminent suspension from the practice of 
law, on or about July 20, 1998, Mr. Zablocki filed a Chapter 7 
bankruptcy action on behalf of the couple jointly in the United 
States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.  
Although there was an obvious conflict of interest between 
Mr. Zablocki’s representation of the wife against her husband in 
the divorce case and the representation of both the husband and 
wife in the bankruptcy case, Mr. Zablocki did not obtain the 
written consent of 
either 
the husband or 
wife to 
this 
arrangement.  At no time did Mr. Zablocki notify the husband or 
wife of the fact that his license was to be suspended and that 
he would be unable to act as their attorney after that date.  He 
also did not notify the bankruptcy trustee or bankruptcy court 
of his suspension and inability to act after August 10, 1998, 
nor did he notify the branch of the Milwaukee County Circuit 
Court before which the divorce case was pending of his 
suspension 
and 
inability 
to 
act 
after 
August 
10, 
1998.  
Mr. Zablocki did not refund any portion of the fee the couple 
had paid him for the bankruptcy action.   
¶4 
The referee, Michael Ash, concluded, and this court 
agrees, that by representing the wife in the bankruptcy case 
when his representation was directly adverse to the husband and 
when his representation of the wife was materially limited by 
his responsibility to the husband, without obtaining written 
consent from each client, Mr. Zablocki violated SCR 20:1.7(a) 
No. 
00-0818-D   
 
4 
 
and (b);2 by failing to notify either the husband or wife by 
certified mail of his suspension and by failing to notify both 
the divorce court and the bankruptcy court, before which cases 
were pending, of his suspension, Mr. Zablocki failed to properly 
and timely notify a client and two courts of the suspension of 
his law license and his inability to act in pending matters, he 
violated SCR 22.26(1)(a) and (b);3 by failing to refund the 
                                                 
2 Former SCR 20:1.7(a) and (b) provided: 
(a) A 
lawyer 
shall 
not 
represent 
a 
client 
if 
the 
representation of that client will be directly adverse to 
another client, unless:  
(1) the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will 
not adversely affect the relationship with the other client; and  
(2) each client consents in writing after consultation.  
(b) A 
lawyer 
shall 
not 
represent 
a 
client 
if 
the 
representation of that client may be materially limited by the 
lawyer's responsibilities to another client or to a third 
person, or by the lawyer's own interests, unless:  
(1) the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will 
not be adversely affected; and  
(2) the client consents in writing after consultation.  
When representation of multiple clients in a single matter is 
undertaken, the consultation shall include explanation of the 
implications of the common representation and the advantages and 
risks involved.  
3 Former SCR 22.26(1)(a) and (b) provided:  
(1)(a) A disbarred or suspended attorney on or before the 
effective date of disbarment or suspension shall:  
1. Notify, by certified mail, all clients being represented 
in 
pending 
matters 
of 
the 
disbarment 
or 
suspension 
and 
consequent inability to act as an attorney after the effective 
date of the disbarment or suspension.  
No. 
00-0818-D   
 
5 
 
portion of the advance fee payment for the bankruptcy that he 
had not fully earned, he violated SCR 20:1.16(d);4 and by failing 
to keep complete records of trust account funds, he violated 
SCR 20:1.15(e).5 
                                                                                                                                                             
2. Advise the clients to seek legal advice of the client's 
own choice elsewhere.  
(b) A disbarred or suspended attorney with a matter pending 
before a court or administrative agency shall promptly notify 
the court or administrative agency and the attorney for each 
party of the disbarment or suspension and consequent inability 
to act as an attorney after the effective date of the disbarment 
or suspension.  The notice must identify the successor attorney 
or, if there is none at the time of the notice, state the place 
of residence of the client of the disbarred or suspended 
attorney.  
4 Former SCR 20:1.16(d) provided: 
(d) 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.  
5 Former SCR 20:1.15(e) provided: 
No. 
00-0818-D   
 
6 
 
¶5 
Although Mr. Zablocki’s license to practice law in 
Wisconsin 
has 
already 
been 
suspended 
and 
has 
not 
been 
reinstated, the actions described above constitute additional 
misconduct warranting an additional sanction.  In order to 
impress upon him the seriousness of his misconduct, and in order 
to protect the public, the courts and the legal system from a 
possible repetition of the same misconduct, and to deter other 
attorneys from similar misconduct, this court concludes that a 
public reprimand is appropriate. 
¶6 
IT IS ORDERED that Thomas E. Zablocki is publicly 
reprimanded for his professional misconduct. 
                                                                                                                                                             
(e) Complete records of trust account funds and other trust 
property shall be kept by the lawyer and shall be preserved for 
a period of at least six years after termination of the 
representation.  Complete records shall include: (i) a cash 
receipts journal, listing the sources and date of each receipt, 
(ii) a disbursements journal, listing the date and payee of each 
disbursement, with all disbursements being paid by check, (iii) 
a subsidiary ledger containing a separate page for each person 
or company for whom funds have been received in trust, showing 
the date and amount of each receipt, the date and amount of each 
disbursement, and any unexpended balance, (iv) a monthly 
schedule of the subsidiary ledger, indicating the balance of 
each client's account at the end of each month, (v) a 
determination of the cash balance (checkbook balance) at the end 
of 
each 
month, 
taken 
from 
the 
cash 
receipts 
and 
cash 
disbursement journals and a reconciliation of the cash balance 
(checkbook balance) with the balance indicated in the bank 
statement, and (vi) monthly statements, including canceled 
checks, vouchers or share drafts, and duplicate deposit slips.  
A record of all property other than cash which is held in trust 
for clients or third persons, as required by paragraph (a) 
hereof, shall also be maintained.  All trust account records 
shall be deemed to have public aspects as related to the 
lawyer's fitness to practice.   
No. 
00-0818-D   
 
7 
 
¶7 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Thomas E. Zablocki be 
required to pay all costs and expenses of this disciplinary 
proceeding.  If the costs are not paid, and absent a showing to 
this court of his inability to pay the costs, the license of 
Thomas E. Zablocki to practice law in Wisconsin shall be 
suspended until further order of this court. 
  
No. 
00-0818-D   
 
 
 
1