2016 WI 19
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN
CASE NO.: 2015AP2032-D
COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against
Leonard G. Adent, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation,
Complainant,
v.
Leonard G. Adent,
Respondent.
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ADENT
OPINION FILED: March 29, 2016
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS:
ORAL ARGUMENT:
SOURCE OF APPEAL:
COURT:
COUNTY:
JUDGE:
JUSTICES:
CONCURRED:
DISSENTED: ABRAHAMSON, J., joined by BRADLEY, A.W., J.
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ATTORNEYS:
2016 WI 19
NOTICE
This opinion is subject to further
editing and modification. The final
version will appear in the bound
volume of the official reports.
No. 2015AP2032-D
STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Leonard G. Adent, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation, FILED
Complainant,
MAR 29, 2016
v.
Diane M. Fremgen
Clerk of Supreme Court
Leonard G. Adent,
Respondent.
ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney publicly
reprimanded.
¶1 PER CURIAM. We review a stipulation pursuant to
Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 22.12 between the Office of Lawyer
Regulation (OLR) and Attorney Leonard G. Adent. In the
stipulation, Attorney Adent agrees with the OLR's position that
his misconduct warrants the imposition of a public reprimand.
Attorney Adent also agrees with the OLR's position that various
conditions be imposed upon his continued practice of law in
Wisconsin.
No. 2015AP2032-D
¶2 After fully reviewing the stipulation and the facts of
this matter, we accept the stipulation and impose the public
reprimand jointly requested by the parties. We further find it
appropriate to impose the recommended conditions upon Attorney
Adent's practice of law. In light of the parties' stipulation
and the fact that no referee needed to be appointed, we impose
no costs upon Attorney Adent.
¶3 Attorney Adent was admitted to practice law in
Wisconsin in 1967 and practices in Pewaukee. Attorney Adent's
disciplinary history consists of a 2012 consensual public
reprimand for a conviction of second offense operating while
intoxicated (OWI) and for failure to provide competent or
diligent representation to a client, failure to obey an
obligation under the rules of a tribunal, and failure to make a
reasonably diligent effort to comply with a defendant's
discovery request. In addition, Attorney Adent failed to report
his OWI conviction to the OLR or to the clerk of this court, and
he failed to fully answer the OLR's inquiries during the OLR's
investigation. Public Reprimand of Leonard G. Adent, 2012-19.
¶4 On October 9, 2015, the OLR filed a complaint alleging
five counts of professional misconduct against Attorney Adent.
On October 26, 2015, Attorney Adent entered into a stipulation
whereby he agrees that the factual allegations contained in the
OLR's complaint are accurate and that he committed the
professional misconduct charged in the complaint. The
stipulation states that Attorney Adent fully understands the
nature of the misconduct allegations against him, his right to
2
No. 2015AP2032-D
contest those allegations, and the ramifications that would
follow from this court's imposition of the stipulated level of
discipline. The stipulation indicates that Attorney Adent
understands his right to counsel. He verifies that he is
entering into the stipulation knowingly and voluntarily and that
his entry into the stipulation represents his decision not to
contest this matter.
¶5 The OLR's complaint alleged that, since at least 2009,
Attorney Adent maintained the "Leonard G. Adent Attorney at Law
IOLTA Trust Account" at the Waukesha State Bank. Attorney Adent
used the trust account for, among other things, holding funds of
clients and/or third parties. Until late March 2014, Attorney
Adent had neither a business bank account nor a personal bank
account. He retained earned fees in his trust account and used
the trust account to pay personal expenses. In July 2013, the
Waukesha State Bank advised Attorney Adent that it could no
longer cash personal checks made payable to Attorney Adent and
that he must open a personal account. Attorney Adent opened a
new account in March 2014. The account was identified as "Mr.
Leonard G. Adent" without reference to "Attorney," "Law Office,"
"Business Account," "Office Account," "Operating Account," or
similar words. Attorney Adent informed the OLR that the account
was a personal account and not a business account.
¶6 The OLR's complaint also alleged that on November 14,
2013, Attorney Adent made a cash deposit of $260 into the trust
account and failed to record any information identifying the
client or matter on the deposit slip, and he informed the OLR
3
No. 2015AP2032-D
that he was unsure as to which client the deposit related.
Attorney Adent held a $2,735 fee in his trust account and never
withdrew it. On January 9, 2014, Attorney Adent deposited a
$1,500 loan from T.D., a client who Attorney Adent was
representing in a foreclosure action, into his trust account.
Attorney Adent failed to record any information identifying the
client or matter on the deposit slip. The terms of the loan
transaction were not transmitted in writing to T.D., nor did
Attorney Adent advise T.D. in writing of the desirability of
seeking independent legal counsel. T.D. did not give his
informed written consent to the essential terms of the loan
transaction. On or about April 26, 2014, after the OLR had
inquired about the matter, and well over three months following
the loan, T.D. signed a written statement and promissory note
with Attorney Adent. The note was backdated to January 8, 2014.
¶7 On February 10, 2011, Attorney Adent was convicted of
an OWI (second) conviction in Fond du Lac County, Wisconsin. On
April 17, 2014, a Door County Sheriff's Department deputy
observed a vehicle operated by Attorney Adent cross the center
line and initiated a traffic stop of the vehicle. Attorney
Adent was placed under arrest for operating a motor vehicle
while under the influence of an intoxicant (third offense).
Attorney Adent reported his arrest to the OLR on July 8, 2014.
On November 25, 2014, pursuant to a guilty plea, Attorney Adent
was convicted of misdemeanor OWI (third), sentenced to 150 days
in jail with Huber privileges, and fined, and his driver license
was revoked for 33 months.
4
No. 2015AP2032-D
¶8 The OLR's complaint alleged that Attorney Adent
engaged in the following counts of misconduct:
[Count One] By receiving trust funds but failing
to maintain a business account, Adent violated
1
SCR 20:1.15(e)(8).
[Count Two] By commingling his personal funds
with client funds held in his Trust Account, for
purposes other than paying monthly bank account
service charges, Adent violated SCR 20:1.15(b)(3).2
[Count Three] By accepting a $1,500 loan from a
client in January 2014, without any required written
disclosures or the client's informed consent and no
documentation of the transaction other than a back-
dated promissory note, Adent violated SCR 20:1.8(a).3
1
SCR 20:1.15(e)(8) provides that "[e]ach lawyer who
receives trust funds shall maintain at least one draft account,
other than the trust account, for funds received and disbursed
other than in the lawyer's trust capacity, which shall be
entitled 'Business Account,' 'Office Account,' 'Operating
Account,' or words of similar import."
2
SCR 20:1.15(b)(3) provides that "[n]o funds belonging to
the lawyer or law firm, except funds reasonably sufficient to
pay monthly account service charges, may be deposited or
retained in a trust account."
3
SCR 20:1.8(a) provides:
A lawyer shall not enter into a business
transaction with a client or knowingly acquire an
ownership, possessory, security or other pecuniary
interest adverse to a client unless:
(1) the transaction and terms on which the lawyer
acquires the interest are fair and reasonable to the
client and are fully disclosed and transmitted in
writing in a manner that can be reasonably understood
by the client;
(2) the client is advised in writing of the
desirability of seeking and is given a reasonable
(continued)
5
No. 2015AP2032-D
[Count Four] By failing to maintain a
transaction register, individual client ledgers, a
ledger for account fees and charges, by disbursing
checks from his trust account without identifying the
client matter and the reason for the disbursement on
the memo line or by using the memo line to attribute
checks to a client matter when actually disbursing his
personal funds, by failing to record the client or
matter associated with each deposit item on his
deposit slips, and by failing to perform monthly
reconciliations of his IOLTA checking account, Adent
violated SCR 20:1.15(f)(1).4
opportunity to seek the advice of independent legal
counsel on the transaction; and
(3) the client gives informed consent, in a
writing signed by the client, to the essential terms
of the transaction and the lawyer's role in the
transaction, including whether the lawyer is
representing the client in the transaction.
4
SCR 20:1.15(f)(1) provides:
Complete records of a trust account that is a
draft account shall include a transaction register;
individual client ledgers for IOLTA accounts and other
pooled trust accounts; a ledger for account fees and
charges, if law firm funds are held in the account
pursuant to sub. (b)(3); deposit records; disbursement
records; monthly statements; and reconciliation
reports, subject to all of the following:
a. Transaction register. The transaction register
shall contain a chronological record of all account
transactions, and shall include all of the following:
1. the date, source, and amount of all deposits;
2. the date, check or transaction number, payee
and amount of all disbursements, whether by check,
wire transfer, or other means;
3. the date and amount of every other deposit or
deduction of whatever nature;
(continued)
6
No. 2015AP2032-D
4. the identity of the client for whom funds were
deposited or disbursed; and
5. the balance in the account after each
transaction.
b. Individual client ledgers. A subsidiary ledger
shall be maintained for each client or 3rd party for
whom the lawyer receives trust funds that are
deposited in an IOLTA account or any other pooled
trust account. The lawyer shall record each receipt
and disbursement of a client's or 3rd party's funds
and the balance following each transaction. A lawyer
shall not disburse funds from an IOLTA account or any
pooled trust account that would create a negative
balance with respect to any individual client or
matter.
c. Ledger for account fees and charges. A
subsidiary ledger shall be maintained for funds of the
lawyer deposited in the trust account to accommodate
monthly service charges. Each deposit and expenditure
of the lawyer's funds in the account and the balance
following each transaction shall be identified in the
ledger.
d. Deposit records. Deposit slips shall identify
the name of the lawyer or law firm, and the name of
the account. The deposit slip shall identify the
amount of each deposit item, the client or matter
associated with each deposit item, and the date of the
deposit. The lawyer shall maintain a copy or duplicate
of each deposit slip. All deposits shall be made
intact. No cash, or other form of disbursement, shall
be deducted from a deposit. Deposits of wired funds
shall be documented in the account's monthly
statement.
e. Disbursement records.
1. Checks. Checks shall be pre-printed and
prenumbered. The name and address of the lawyer or law
firm, and the name of the account shall be printed in
the upper left corner of the check. Trust account
checks shall include the words "Client Account," or
"Trust Account," or words of similar import in the
(continued)
7
No. 2015AP2032-D
account name. Each check disbursed from the trust
account shall identify the client matter and the
reason for the disbursement on the memo line.
2. Canceled checks. Canceled checks shall be
obtained from the financial institution. Imaged checks
may be substituted for canceled checks.
3. Imaged checks. Imaged checks shall be
acceptable if they provide both the front and reverse
of the check and comply with the requirements of this
paragraph. The information contained on the reverse
side of the imaged checks shall include any
endorsement signatures or stamps, account numbers, and
transaction dates that appear on the original. Imaged
checks shall be of sufficient size to be readable
without magnification and as close as possible to the
size of the original check.
4. Wire transfers. Wire transfers shall be
documented by a written withdrawal authorization or
other documentation, such as a monthly statement of
the account that indicates the date of the transfer,
the payee, and the amount.
f. Monthly statement. The monthly statement
provided to the lawyer or law firm by the financial
institution shall identify the name and address of the
lawyer or law firm and the name of the account.
g. Reconciliation reports. For each trust
account, the lawyer shall prepare and retain a printed
reconciliation report on a regular and periodic basis
not less frequently than every 30 days. Each
reconciliation report shall show all of the following
balances and verify that they are identical:
1. the balance that appears in the transaction
register as of the reporting date;
2. the total of all subsidiary ledger balances
for IOLTA accounts and other pooled trust accounts,
determined by listing and totaling the balances in the
individual client ledgers and the ledger for account
fees and charges, as of the reporting date; and
(continued)
8
No. 2015AP2032-D
[Count Five] By engaging in conduct leading to a
criminal conviction of OWI (3rd), Adent violated
SCR 20:8.4(b).5
¶9 In the stipulation, Attorney Adent agrees that it
would be appropriate for this court to publicly reprimand him.
He further agrees that it would be appropriate for this court to
impose the following conditions upon him:
Within 60 days of the Court's final order,
Attorney Adent must provide to OLR signed medical
releases of confidentiality for each treatment
provider who has provided or is providing
alcohol-related or substance abuse-related
treatment, assessment or services to Attorney
Adent during the past five years, so that OLR and
each provider can share pertinent information
related to Attorney Adent, such releases to
remain in effect for two years from the date
Attorney Adent signs the releases;
Within 60 days of the Court's final order,
Attorney Adent must, at his own expense,
participate in an alcohol and other drug abuse
(AODA) and mental health assessment by a person
of OLR's choosing, which shall make specific
written recommendations, if appropriate, for
Attorney Adent's treatment or maintenance. The
assessment must be provided to OLR;
Attorney Adent must submit to monitoring within
30 days of the date of the assessment, as
3. the adjusted balance, determined by adding
outstanding deposits and other credits to the balance
in the financial institution's monthly statement and
subtracting outstanding checks and other deductions
from the balance in the monthly statement.
5
SCR 20:8.4(b) provides that it is professional misconduct
for a lawyer to "commit a criminal act that reflects adversely
on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer
in other respects."
9
No. 2015AP2032-D
directed by OLR; and for a period of two years
beginning on the date of his entry into a
monitoring program must comply with all
monitoring requirements, including all
requirements determined to be appropriate by the
Wisconsin Lawyers' Assistance Program (WisLAP) or
OLR's designated monitor;
Attorney Adent must refrain from the consumption
of alcohol and any mood-altering drugs without a
valid prescription while subject to monitoring;
Within 90 days of the Court's final order,
Attorney Adent must establish a business account.
Attorney Adent must provide OLR with a copy of
the first bank statement for the business
account;
For a period of one year following his
establishment of a business account, Attorney
Adent must provide OLR on a quarterly basis with
copies of the monthly bank statements for the
business account;
For a period of one year following the Court's
final order, Attorney Adent must provide OLR on a
quarterly basis with the monthly bank statements,
the transaction register, all subsidiary ledgers,
and the monthly reconciliation reports relating
to the trust account[.]
¶10 Having considered this matter, we approve the
stipulation and adopt the stipulated facts and legal conclusions
of professional misconduct. From our independent review of the
matter, we agree that a public reprimand is an appropriate
sanction. We note that the OLR's memorandum in support of the
stipulation identifies a number of aggravating and mitigating
factors. With respect to aggravating factors, the OLR points
out that Attorney Adent has substantial experience in practicing
law, having been admitted in 1967. The OLR also notes that
10
No. 2015AP2032-D
Attorney Adent previously agreed to a consensual public
reprimand for lack of diligence and for being convicted of OWI
(second). In addition, the OLR says that, during the course of
its investigation, Attorney Adent represented in two letters to
the OLR that he had opened a business checking account when in
fact the account he opened was a personal account.
¶11 With respect to mitigating factors, the OLR noted that
Attorney Adent had an absence of dishonest or selfish motive and
that he suffered from personal or emotional problems which he
blamed for the issues with his bank accounts. The OLR also
noted that Attorney Adent was the subject of penalties,
including jail time, driver license revocation, and a fine, for
the third offense OWI. Finally, the OLR said that Attorney
Adent fully cooperated with the investigation and expressed
remorse for his actions.
¶12 Although no two factual situations are ever precisely
the same, a public reprimand is generally consistent with the
sanction this court has imposed in somewhat similar cases,
including In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against LeSieur,
2010 WI 117, 329 Wis. 2d 349, 789 N.W.2d 572 (attorney publicly
reprimanded for misconduct including a violation of
SCR 20:8.4(b), which stemmed from an OWI (third) conviction);
Public Reprimand of Scott A. Jackman, 2010-9 (attorney publicly
reprimanded for convictions of OWI (second) and (third) and
failure to report convictions to the OLR). We further find it
appropriate to impose the recommended conditions upon Attorney
Adent. Because Attorney Adent entered into a comprehensive
11
No. 2015AP2032-D
stipulation under SCR 22.12, thereby obviating the need for the
appointment of a referee and a full disciplinary proceeding, we
do not impose any costs in this matter.
¶13 IT IS ORDERED that Leonard G. Adent is publicly
reprimanded.
¶14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following conditions
are hereby imposed upon Leonard G. Adent:
Within 60 days of the date of this order, Attorney
Adent shall provide the Office of Lawyer Regulation
with signed medical releases of confidentiality for
each treatment provider who is providing or has
provided to Attorney Adent within the last five
years treatment, assessment, or services related to
alcohol or substance abuse, such releases to remain
in effect for two years from the date of signature.
Within 60 days of the date of this order, Attorney
Adent shall, at his own expense, participate in an
alcohol and other drug abuse and mental health
assessment by a person of the Office of Lawyer
Regulation's choosing; the assessment shall make
specific written recommendations, if appropriate,
for Attorney Adent's treatment or maintenance and
shall be provided to the Office of Lawyer
Regulation.
Within 30 days of the date of the assessment
specified above, Attorney Adent shall submit to
monitoring as directed by the Office of Lawyer
12
No. 2015AP2032-D
Regulation, and he shall comply with all monitoring
requirements, including all requirements deemed
appropriate by the Wisconsin Lawyers' Assistance
Program or other monitor designated by the Office of
Lawyer Regulation, for a period of two years from
his entry into a monitoring program.
Attorney Adent shall refrain from the consumption of
alcohol and any mood-altering drugs without a valid
prescription while subject to monitoring.
Within 90 days of the date of this order, Attorney
Adent shall establish a business account and shall
provide the Office of Lawyer Regulation with a copy
of the first bank statement for said account.
For a period of one year following the establishment
of the business account specified above, Attorney
Adent shall provide to the Office of Lawyer
Regulation, on a quarterly basis, copies of the
monthly bank statements for said account.
For a period of one year from the date of this
order, Attorney Adent shall provide to the Office of
Lawyer Regulation, on a quarterly basis, copies of
the monthly bank statements, transaction register,
all subsidiary ledgers, and monthly reconciliation
reports related to his trust account.
13
No. 2015AP2032-D.ssa
¶15 SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, J. (dissenting). I would not
accept the stipulation. Although I agree with the order for
restitution, payment of costs, and conditions, I conclude that a
public reprimand is an insufficient sanction.
¶16 Five counts of professional misconduct were charged in
the complaint and admitted by Attorney Adent, including trust
account violations, criminal conviction of operating while
intoxicated (OWI) (third), and a transaction with a client
without informed consent or written disclosures. These are
serious offenses and in and of themselves require a more severe
sanction than a public reprimand.
¶17 The third OWI offense stands out. Drunk driving is a
major public safety issue in Wisconsin and across the country.
All drivers are aware, or should be held to be aware, of the
dangers of drunk driving. That drunk driving may be prosecuted
as a crime is also common knowledge.
¶18 A criminal conviction for OWI by a Wisconsin licensed
lawyer does not in and of itself automatically constitute
professional misconduct. But the record demonstrates that
Attorney Adent has alcohol-related problems. His three OWI
offenses and his numerous other violations of the Rules of
Professional Conduct for Attorneys reflect on his honesty,
trustworthiness, and fitness as a lawyer.
¶19 Although Attorney Adent has been sober for a number of
months, his record is not sufficient to warrant a public
reprimand rather than a suspension.
1
No. 2015AP2032-D.ssa
¶20 In addition, a public reprimand in the instant case
does not properly take into account this court's commitment that
discipline be generally progressive in nature. See In re
Disciplinary Proceedings Against Nussberger, 2006 WI 111, 296
Wis. 2d 47, 719 N.W.2d 501.
¶21 Attorney Adent has a disciplinary history that
supports the imposition of progressive discipline. In 2012,
Attorney Adent consented to a public reprimand for a number of
violations, including conviction of second offense OWI, failure
to provide competent or diligent representation, and failure to
obey an obligation under the rules of the tribunal.
¶22 I recognize that several cases have imposed a public
reprimand for OWI violations. On reflection, I think some of
these sanctions were not adequate and should not be followed in
the instant case.
¶23 For the reasons set forth, I disagree that the
imposition of a public reprimand is an appropriate level of
discipline in the instant case. I would impose a suspension for
a minimum of 60 days.
¶24 I am authorized to state that Justice ANN WALSH
BRADLEY joins this opinion.
2
No. 2015AP2032-D.ssa
1