2016 WI 88
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN
CASE NO.: 2016AP1080-D
COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Stephen B. Manion, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation,
Complainant,
v.
Stephen B. Manion,
Respondent.
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST MANION
OPINION FILED: October 21, 2016
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS:
ORAL ARGUMENT:
SOURCE OF APPEAL:
COURT:
COUNTY:
JUDGE:
JUSTICES:
CONCURRED:
DISSENTED:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ATTORNEYS:
2016 WI 88
NOTICE
This opinion is subject to further
editing and modification. The final
version will appear in the bound
volume of the official reports.
No. 2016AP1080-D
STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Stephen B. Manion, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation, FILED
Complainant, OCT 21, 2016
v. Diane M. Fremgen
Clerk of Supreme Court
Stephen B. Manion,
Respondent.
ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney's license
suspended.
¶1 PER CURIAM. This is a reciprocal discipline matter.
On May 31, 2016, the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) filed a
complaint and motion pursuant to Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 22.22,1
1
SCR 22.22 provides: Reciprocal discipline.
(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.
Failure to furnish the notice within 20 days of the
effective date of the order or judgment of the other
jurisdiction constitutes misconduct.
(continued)
No. 2016AP1080-D
requesting this court suspend Attorney Stephen B. Manion's
license to practice law in Wisconsin for a period of six months,
(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.
2
No. 2016AP1080-D
as reciprocal discipline identical to that imposed by the
Arizona Supreme Court, and impose costs. Upon review, we agree
that it is appropriate to impose a six-month suspension,
substantially identical to that imposed by the Arizona Supreme
Court. We decline to award costs.
¶2 Attorney Manion was admitted to practice law in
Wisconsin in 1998. He was admitted to practice law in Arizona
in 2009. He resides in Arizona.
¶3 On March 14, 2016, the Supreme Court of Arizona
accepted an agreement for discipline by consent by which
Attorney Manion was suspended for six months and one day,
effective April 15, 2016, for two counts of professional
misconduct. The following facts are taken from the documents
attached to the OLR's complaint relating to the Arizona
disciplinary proceedings.
¶4 Attorney Manion communicated with an inmate client in
a criminal matter almost exclusively through another inmate who
was serving a sentence for criminal fraud. Attorney Manion's
client suffered financial harm at the hands of the inmate who
Attorney Manion used as the intermediary. Attorney Manion also
transferred funds, at the direction of multiple inmates, in a
manner that allowed the inmates to circumvent prison policy
thereby violating multiple Arizona trust account rules including
ER 1.4, ER 1.15(a), ER 8.4(d), Rule 43(b)(1)(A), Rule
43(b)(a)(C) and Rule 43(b)(5).
¶5 In addition, Attorney Manion assisted an inmate client
in collecting a share of an inheritance. Attorney Manion
3
No. 2016AP1080-D
distributed the money at the client's direction in a manner that
allowed the client to circumvent prison policy. The client also
suffered financial harm due to the fraudulent actions of the
same inmate Attorney Manion used as the intermediary in Count
One. By these actions Attorney Manion violated ER 1.4, ER 1.6,
ER 1.7, and ER 8.4(d). See Manion, Stephen Brian #026912; PDJ-
2015-9109
(http://www.azcourts.gov/Portals/101/March%202016/Manion,%20Step
hen%20Brian%20026912%20PDJ-2015-9109.pdf).
¶6 Attorney Manion did not notify the OLR of the Arizona
suspension within 20 days of its effective date.
¶7 The OLR complaint alleges that by virtue of the
Arizona suspension, Attorney Manion is subject to reciprocal
discipline in Wisconsin pursuant to SCR 22.22, and, by failing
to notify the OLR of his suspension in Arizona for professional
misconduct within 20 days of the effective date of its
imposition, Attorney Manion violated SCR 22.22(1). The OLR asks
this court to suspend Attorney Manion's Wisconsin law license
for six months as discipline reciprocal to that imposed in
Arizona, and to impose costs.
¶8 On August 10, 2016, this court directed Attorney
Manion 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 Arizona would be unwarranted, and of the factual
basis for any such claim. No response was received.
4
No. 2016AP1080-D
¶9 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 substantially identical to that
imposed by the Supreme Court of Arizona.
¶10 We decline to impose the costs of this proceeding on
Attorney Manion. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against
Hooker, 2012 WI 100, ¶26, 343 Wis. 2d 397, 816 N.W.2d 310
(noting that in reciprocal discipline cases where a referee is
not appointed, costs are generally not imposed as there are no
referee expenses and the proceedings are less involved).
¶11 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Stephen B. Manion to
practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period of six
months, effective the date of this order.
¶12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent he has not
already done so, Stephen B. Manion 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
Arizona Supreme Court required for reinstatement. See SCR
22.29(4)(c).
5
No. 2016AP1080-D
1