Court Opinion

ID: 9818953
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 06:15:28.578217+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:26:21.218078
License: Public Domain

SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, J.
¶ 28. (concurring). I write to express concern that the per curiam does not sufficiently justify the 60-day suspension the court approves in this stipulated matter. Attorney Runyon and the OLR stipulated to the violation of the trust accounting rules and to a 60-day suspension.
*42¶ 29. Attorney Runyon has had two prior brushes with OLR. In 1988, his license was suspended for one year. In 2006, he received a private reprimand.
¶ 30. In contrast, Attorney Thomas Mulligan receives a 9-month suspension for violating trust accounting rules. OLR v. Mulligan, 2015 WI 96, 365 Wis. 2d 43, 870 N.W.2d 233. Attorney Mulligan contested the OLR complaint and proposed discipline. Attorney Mulligan has had three prior brushes with OLR. In 1997, Attorney Mulligan received a private reprimand. In 2005, Mulligan received a private reprimand. In 2009, he received a public reprimand.
¶ 31. I have difficulty reconciling the significantly different levels of discipline imposed in these two trust accounting violation cases.