Court Opinion

ID: 9685450
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 14:38:25.81785+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:06.261453
License: Public Domain

DIANE S. SYKES, J.
¶ 14. (dissenting). I would reject the parties' stipulation asking this court to suspend Dianna Brooks's license to practice law in this state for 90 days as reciprocal discipline for her admit*624ted acts of misconduct in Michigan. That 90-day suspension is identical to the discipline imposed against her by the Michigan Attorney Discipline Board pursuant to her stipulation for consensual discipline in that state. Supreme Court Rule 22.22(3) directs this court in reciprocal disciplinary matters to impose the identical discipline or license suspension imposed by the other jurisdiction unless the misconduct justifies substantially different discipline in this state. See SCR 22.22(3)(c). I believe that had Dianna Brooks's admitted acts of misconduct been committed in this state, this court would have been justified in imposing a substantially different and significantly more severe discipline than a 90-day suspension of her license. Rather than automatically following Michigan's disciplinary disposition, I would, pursuant to SCR 22.12(3), reject the parties' stipulation and refer this matter to a referee for a hearing and report and recommendation on the appropriate discipline to be imposed in Wisconsin for Ms. Brooks's serious acts of misconduct. See SCR 22.22(5). Accordingly, I dissent.