Title: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Mark G. Pierquet
Citation: 2007 WI 64
Docket Number: 2006AP002215-D
State: Wisconsin
Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Date: May 30, 2007

2007 WI 64 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2006AP2215-D 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against Mark G. Pierquet, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
Mark G. Pierquet, 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST PIERQUET 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
May 30, 2007   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
        
 
DISSENTED: 
        
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:         
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
      
 
 
2007 WI 64
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.  2006AP2215-D  
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings  
Against Mark G. Pierquet, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
Mark G. Pierquet, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
MAY 30, 2007 
 
David R. Schanker 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY 
disciplinary 
proceeding.   
Attorney's 
license 
revoked. 
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.   Attorney Mark G. Pierquet has filed a 
petition for consensual license revocation pursuant to SCR 22.191 
                                                 
1 SCR 22.19 states in relevant part:  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. 
2006AP2215-D   
 
2 
 
stating that he cannot successfully defend against 32 counts of 
professional misconduct charged in a pending disciplinary action 
as well as other allegations of misconduct currently under 
investigation.   
¶2 
Attorney Pierquet was admitted to practice law in 
Wisconsin in 2001 and practiced in Menasha.  In 2005 he was 
publicly reprimanded for failing to reduce a contingent fee 
agreement to writing; failing to act with reasonable diligence 
and promptness in representing a client; engaging in conduct 
involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; and 
failing 
to 
abide 
by 
a 
client's 
decision 
concerning 
the 
objectives of a representation and failing to consult with the 
client.  In addition to the public reprimand, Attorney Pierquet 
was ordered to continue medical treatment, comply with all 
treatment recommendations, and biannually provide full medical 
treatment records for two years following the date of this 
court's order.  See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against 
Pierquet, 2005 WI 147, 286 Wis. 2d 87, 705 N.W.2d 90. 
¶3 
On July 25, 2006, this court temporarily suspended 
Attorney Pierquet's license based on his failure to comply with 
                                                                                                                                                             
(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. 
2006AP2215-D   
 
3 
 
the conditions imposed on his practice of law and also for his 
willful failure to respond or cooperate in pending Office of 
Lawyer Regulation (OLR) grievance investigations.  His license 
remains suspended.  
¶4 
The 32 counts of misconduct arise from 12 client 
matters.  Counts 1 and 2 involve the failure to provide 
competent representation to a client, contrary to SCR 20:1.12 and 
failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to 
alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2)3 and SCR 
22.03(6),4 actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).5   
                                                 
2 SCR 20:1.1 provides that "[a] lawyer shall provide 
competent representation to a client.  Competent representation 
requires 
the 
legal 
knowledge, 
skill, 
thoroughness 
and 
preparation reasonably necessary for the representation." 
3 SCR 22.03(2) provides:  Investigation. 
 
(2) 
Upon 
commencing 
an 
investigation, 
the 
director shall notify the respondent of the matter 
being investigated unless in the opinion of the 
director the investigation of the matter requires 
otherwise.  The respondent shall fully and fairly 
disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to the 
alleged misconduct within 20 days after being served 
by ordinary mail a request for a written response.  
The director may allow additional time to respond.  
Following receipt of the response, the director may 
conduct further investigation and may compel the 
respondent to answer questions, furnish documents, and 
present 
any 
information 
deemed 
relevant 
to 
the 
investigation. 
4 SCR 22.03(6) provides:  Investigation.  "In the course of 
the investigation, the respondent's wilful failure to provide 
relevant information, to answer questions fully, or to furnish 
documents and the respondent's misrepresentation in a disclosure 
are misconduct, regardless of the merits of the matters asserted 
in the grievance." 
No. 
2006AP2215-D   
 
4 
 
¶5 
Counts 3 and 4 involve failing to explain a matter to 
the extent reasonably necessary to permit a client to make 
informed decisions regarding representation, in violation of SCR 
20:1.4(b)6 and willfully failing to cooperate with the OLR, in 
violation of SCR 21.15(4).7  Count 5 also involves failing to 
disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged 
misconduct. 
¶6 
Counts 6—9 involve failing to act with reasonable 
diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation 
of SCR 20:1.3;8 failing to keep a client reasonably informed 
about the status of a matter, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(a);9 
failing to take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to 
protect a client's interests upon termination of representation, 
                                                                                                                                                             
5 SCR 20.8.4(f) provides that 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." 
6 SCR 20:1.4(b) provides the "[a] lawyer shall explain a 
matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client 
to make informed decisions regarding the representation." 
7 SCR 
21.15(4) 
provides 
that 
"[e]very 
attorney 
shall 
cooperate 
with 
the 
office 
of 
lawyer 
regulation 
in 
the 
investigation, 
prosecution 
and 
disposition 
of 
grievances, 
complaints filed with or by the director, and petitions for 
reinstatement.  An attorney's wilful failure to cooperate with 
the office of lawyer regulation constitutes violation of the 
rules of professional conduct for attorneys." 
8 SCR 20:1.3 provides that "[a] lawyer shall act with 
reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client." 
9 SCR 20:1.4(a) provides that "[a] lawyer shall keep a 
client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and 
promptly comply with reasonable requests for information." 
No. 
2006AP2215-D   
 
5 
 
in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d);10 and willfully failing to 
cooperate with the OLR.   
¶7 
Counts 10—13 involve failing to reduce a contingent 
fee agreement to writing, in violation of SCR 20:1.5(c);11 
failing to abide by his client's decisions concerning the 
objectives of representation, failing to consult with his client 
as to the means by which they are to be pursued, and failing to 
inform his client of all offers of settlement and abide by a 
                                                 
10 SCR 20:1.16(d) provides:  Declining or terminating 
representation. 
 
(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. 
11 SCR 20:1.5(c) provides:  Fees. 
 
(c) A fee may be contingent on the outcome of the 
matter for which the service is rendered, except in a 
matter in which a contingent fee is prohibited by 
paragraph (d) or other law.  A contingent fee 
agreement shall be in writing and shall state the 
method by which the fee is to be determined, including 
the percentage or percentages that shall accrue to the 
lawyer in the event of settlement, trial or appeal, 
litigation and other expenses to be deducted from the 
recovery, and whether such expenses are to be deducted 
before or after the contingent fee is calculated.  
Upon conclusion of a contingent fee matter, the lawyer 
shall provide the client with a written statement 
stating the outcome of the matter and if there is a 
recovery, showing the remittance to the client and the 
method of its determination. 
No. 
2006AP2215-D   
 
6 
 
client's decision whether to accept an offer of settlement, in 
violation of SCR 20:1.2(a);12 failing to take steps to the extent 
reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests upon 
termination of representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d); 
and willfully failing to cooperate with the OLR. 
¶8 
Counts 14—16 involve failing to act with reasonable 
diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation 
of SCR 20:1.3; failing to keep a client reasonably informed 
about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable 
requests for information, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(a); and 
willfully failing to disclose all facts and circumstances 
pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), 
actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).  Count 17 involves 
willfully failing to disclose all facts and circumstances 
pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), 
actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f). 
¶9 
Counts 18—21 involve failing to communicate the basis 
or rate of the fee to his client, before or within a reasonable 
                                                 
12 SCR 20:1.2(a) provides:  Scope of representation. 
 
(a) A lawyer shall abide by a client's decisions 
concerning the objectives of representation, subject 
to paragraphs (c), (d) and (e), and shall consult with 
the client as to the means by which they are to be 
pursued.  A lawyer shall inform a client of all offers 
of settlement and abide by a client's decision whether 
to accept an offer of settlement of a matter.  In a 
criminal case or any proceeding that could result in 
deprivation of liberty, the lawyer shall abide by the 
client's decision, after consultation with the lawyer, 
as to a plea to be entered, whether to waive jury 
trial and whether the client will testify. 
No. 
2006AP2215-D   
 
7 
 
time after commencing the representation, in violation of SCR 
20:1.5(b);13 failing to keep a client reasonably informed about 
the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable 
requests for information, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(a); failing 
to take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a 
client's interests upon termination of the representation, in 
violation of SCR 20:1.16(d); and willfully failing to disclose 
all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in 
violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f). 
¶10 Counts 22 and 23 involve failing to take appropriate 
steps to protect a client's interests upon termination of the 
representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d); and willfully 
failing to disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to 
alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable 
pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).   
¶11 Counts 24—27 involve failing to act with reasonable 
diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation 
of SCR 20:1.3; failing to keep a client reasonably informed 
about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable 
requests for information, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(a); failing 
to deposit a client's monies in an identifiable trust account, 
                                                 
13 SCR 20:1.5(b) provides that "[w]hen the lawyer has not 
regularly represented the client, the basis or rate of the fee 
shall be communicated to the client, preferably in writing, 
before or within a reasonable time after commencing the 
representation." 
No. 
2006AP2215-D   
 
8 
 
in violation of SCR 20:1.15(b)(1);14 and willfully failing to 
disclose all facts and circumstances pertaining to alleged 
misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to 
SCR 20:8.4(f).  
¶12 Counts 28 and 29 involve failing to take steps to the 
extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests 
upon 
termination 
of 
representation, 
in 
violation 
of 
SCR 
20:1.16(d); and willfully failing to disclose all facts and 
circumstances pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of 
SCR 22.03(2), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f).   
¶13 Counts 30—32 involve failing to act with reasonable 
diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation 
of SCR 20:1.3; failing to take steps to the extent reasonably 
practicable to protect a client's interests upon termination of 
representation, in violation of SCR 20:1.16(d); and willfully 
failing to cooperate with the OLR, in violation of SCR 21.15(4), 
as well as failing to disclose all facts and circumstances 
pertaining to alleged misconduct, in violation of SCR 22.03(2) 
and SCR 22.03(6), actionable pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f). 
                                                 
14 SCR 
20:1.15(b)(1) 
provides: 
 
Segregation 
of 
trust 
property. 
 
(1) Separate account.  A lawyer shall hold in 
trust, separate from the lawyer's own property, that 
property of clients and 3rd parties that is in the 
lawyer's 
possession 
in 
connection 
with 
a 
representation.  All funds of clients and 3rd parties 
paid to a lawyer or law firm in connection with a 
representation shall be deposited in one or more 
identifiable trust accounts. 
No. 
2006AP2215-D   
 
9 
 
¶14 Ten additional grievances are under investigation.   
¶15 In response to this court's order to show cause, the 
OLR recommends that Attorney Pierquet be ordered to repay the 
State Bar of Wisconsin Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection 
$14,447.47, and that he be ordered to make restitution of $250 
to L.C. and $50 to D.G. 
¶16 Attorney Pierquet submits under SCR 22.19(2) that he 
cannot successfully defend against the allegations of either the 
pending disciplinary proceeding or the grievances currently 
under investigation.  He states that he has carefully considered 
his options; that he is freely, voluntarily and knowingly filing 
the petition for consensual license revocation; and that he 
knows he is giving up his right to a public hearing as well as 
his right to contest each misconduct allegation.   
¶17 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Mark G. Pierquet to 
practice law in Wisconsin is revoked effective the date of this 
order. 
¶18 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Mark G. Pierquet shall 
comply with the provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of 
an attorney whose license to practice law have been revoked, to 
the extent he has not already done so. 
¶19 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date 
of this order Mark G. Pierquet shall pay the State Bar of 
Wisconsin Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection $14,447.47 and 
shall further make restitution of $250 to L.C. and $50 to D.G. 
 
No. 
2006AP2215-D   
 
 
 
1