Title: OLR v. John O. Waters
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 2015AP001649-D
State: Wisconsin
Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Date: March 9, 2016

2016 WI 15 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2015AP1649-D 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings  
Against John O. Waters, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
          Complainant, 
     v. 
John O. Waters, 
          Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST WATERS 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
March 9, 2016 
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
      
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
      
 
COUNTY: 
      
 
JUDGE: 
      
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
 
CONCURRED: 
      
 
DISSENTED: 
      
 
NOT PARTICIPATING:          
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2016 WI 15
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.   2015AP1649-D 
 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 
Against John O. Waters, Attorney at Law: 
 
Office of Lawyer Regulation, 
 
          Complainant, 
 
     v. 
 
John O. Waters, 
 
          Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
MAR 9, 2016 
 
Diane M. Fremgen 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEY 
disciplinary 
proceeding.  Attorney's 
license 
suspended.   
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.   This is a reciprocal discipline matter. 
On November 20, 2015, the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) 
filed an amended complaint and motion pursuant to Supreme Court 
Rule (SCR) 22.22,1 requesting that this court suspend the license 
                                                 
1 SCR 22.22 (Reciprocal discipline) provides:  
(1) An attorney on whom public discipline for 
misconduct 
or 
a 
license 
suspension 
for 
medical 
incapacity has been imposed by another jurisdiction 
shall promptly notify the director of the matter.  
(continued) 
No. 
2015AP1649-D   
 
2 
 
                                                                                                                                                             
Failure to furnish the notice within 20 days of the 
effective date of the order or judgment of the other 
jurisdiction constitutes misconduct. 
(2) Upon the receipt of a certified copy of a 
judgment or order of another jurisdiction imposing 
discipline for misconduct or a license suspension for 
medical incapacity of an attorney admitted to the 
practice of law or engaged in the practice of law in 
this state, the director may file a complaint in the 
supreme court containing all of the following: 
(a) A certified copy of the judgment or order 
from the other jurisdiction. 
(b) A motion requesting an order directing the 
attorney to inform the supreme court in writing within 
20 days of any claim of the attorney predicated on the 
grounds set forth in sub.(3) that the imposition of 
the identical discipline or license suspension by the 
supreme court would be unwarranted and the factual 
basis for the claim. 
(3) The supreme court shall impose the identical 
discipline or license suspension unless one or more of 
the following is present: 
(a) The procedure in the other jurisdiction was 
so lacking in notice or opportunity to be heard as to 
constitute a deprivation of due process. 
(b) 
There 
was 
such 
an 
infirmity 
of 
proof 
establishing the misconduct or medical incapacity that 
the supreme court could not accept as final the 
conclusion in respect to the misconduct or medical 
incapacity,  
(c) 
The 
misconduct 
justifies 
substantially 
different discipline in this state. 
(4) Except as provided in sub.(3), a final 
adjudication in another jurisdiction that an attorney 
has engaged in misconduct or has a medical incapacity 
shall 
be 
conclusive 
evidence 
of 
the 
attorney's 
misconduct or medical incapacity for purposes of a 
proceeding under this rule. 
(continued) 
No. 
2015AP1649-D   
 
3 
 
of Attorney John O. Waters for a period of three years as 
reciprocal discipline identical to that imposed by the State of 
Michigan Attorney Discipline Board.2 
¶2 
Attorney Waters was admitted to practice law in 
Wisconsin in 2002.  He is also admitted to practice law in 
Michigan.  Attorney Waters' Wisconsin law license is currently 
suspended for non-compliance with continuing legal education 
reporting requirements, failure to pay State Bar of Wisconsin 
dues, 
and 
failure 
to 
submit 
the 
required 
trust 
account 
certification to the State Bar.  
¶3 
The OLR's amended complaint noted that on June 19, 
2013, the State of Michigan Attorney Discipline Board suspended 
Attorney Waters' Michigan law license for three years, with a 
retroactive commencement of September 14, 2012, based on a 
                                                                                                                                                             
(5) The supreme court may refer a complaint filed 
under sub. (2) to a referee for a hearing and a report 
and recommendation pursuant to SCR 22.16. At the 
hearing, the burden is on the party seeking the 
imposition 
of 
discipline 
or 
license 
suspension 
different from that imposed in the other jurisdiction 
to demonstrate that the imposition of identical 
discipline or license suspension by the supreme court 
is unwarranted. 
(6) If the discipline or license suspension 
imposed in the other jurisdiction has been stayed, any 
reciprocal discipline or license suspension imposed by 
the supreme court shall be held in abeyance until the 
stay expires. 
2 The OLR filed a complaint on August 13, 2015.  The 
complaint was subsequently amended to include as Exhibit A 
copies of supporting documentation from the Michigan Supreme 
Court. 
No. 
2015AP1649-D   
 
4 
 
consent 
stipulation 
consolidating 
multiple 
proceedings.  
Restitution and conditions were also imposed. 
¶4 
The following facts are taken from the documents 
attached to the OLR's amended complaint relating to the Michigan 
disciplinary proceedings.  The Michigan suspension was based on 
Attorney Waters' September 14, 2012 conviction for felony drug 
offenses, as well as a disciplinary complaint comprised of three 
separate counts of professional misconduct.  These included:  
neglect of a legal matter entrusted to him, in violation of 
Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct (MRPC) 1.1(c); failing to 
act with reasonable diligence, in violation of MRPC 1.3; failing 
to adequately communicate with his client, in violation of MRPC 
1.4(a); failing to refund unearned fees or release the client 
file upon being discharged from the representation of a client, 
in violation of MRPC 1.16(d); engaging in conduct prejudicial to 
the proper administration of justice, in violation of MRPC 
8.4(c) and Michigan Court Rule (MCR) 9.104(1); engaging in 
conduct which exposes the legal profession or the courts to 
obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach, in violation of MCR 
9.104(2); engaging in conduct contrary to justice, ethics, or 
good morals, in violation of MCR 9.104(3); intentionally failing 
to 
respond 
to 
a 
lawful 
demand 
for 
information 
from 
a 
disciplinary authority, in violation of MRPC 8.1(a)(2); and 
failing to answer a request for investigation, in violation of 
MCR 9.104(7) and MCR 9.113(A) and (B)(2). 
No. 
2015AP1649-D   
 
5 
 
¶5 
The OLR noted that Attorney Waters failed to notify 
the OLR of the Michigan suspension within 20 days of the 
effective date of the order, as required under SCR 22.22(1).  
¶6 
The OLR asks this court to suspend Attorney Waters' 
Wisconsin law license for three years as discipline reciprocal 
to that imposed in Michigan, to order him to comply with 
Michigan's order of restitution, with conditions, and to impose 
costs. 
¶7 
On November 24, 2015, this court directed Attorney 
Waters to inform the court in writing within 20 days of any 
claim by him, predicated upon the grounds set forth in 
SCR 22.22(3), that the imposition of discipline reciprocal to 
that imposed in Michigan would be unwarranted, and of the 
factual basis for any such claim.  No response was received. 
¶8 
Under SCR 22.22(3), in reciprocal discipline matters, 
this court shall impose the identical discipline unless one of 
the exceptions enumerated in the rule is shown.  There is no 
indication that any of those exceptions apply in this case.  
Therefore, we impose discipline identical to that imposed by the 
State of Michigan Attorney Discipline Board.  
¶9 
We also agree that Attorney Waters shall pay the full 
costs of this proceeding.  Attorney Waters has not identified 
any factors that would justify a reduction in costs.  See 
SCR 22.24(1m).  He is also directed to comply with the 
restitution order imposed by the State of Michigan Attorney 
Discipline Board.  Grievance Administrator v. John Oren Waters, 
Case Nos. 12-101-AI; 12-140-JC; 13-47-GA. 
No. 
2015AP1649-D   
 
6 
 
¶10 IT IS ORDERED that the license of John O. Waters to 
practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period of three 
years, effective the date of this order.  
¶11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date 
of this order, John O. Waters shall pay to the Office of Lawyer 
Regulation the costs of this proceeding.  
¶12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent he has not 
already done so, John O. Waters shall comply with the provisions 
of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of a person whose license to 
practice law in Wisconsin has been suspended. 
¶13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that compliance with all 
conditions of this order, as well as compliance with all 
conditions of the disciplinary orders imposed on him by the 
State of Michigan Attorney Discipline Board, is required for 
reinstatement.  See SCR 22.29(4)(c). 
 
No. 
2015AP1649-D   
 
 
 
1