2016 WI 86
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN
CASE NO.: 2016AP1204-D
COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Harvey N. Jones, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation,
Complainant,
v.
Harvey N. Jones,
Respondent.
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST JONES
OPINION FILED: October 18, 2016
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS:
ORAL ARGUMENT:
SOURCE OF APPEAL:
COURT:
COUNTY:
JUDGE:
JUSTICES:
CONCURRED:
DISSENTED:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ATTORNEYS:
2016 WI 86
NOTICE
This opinion is subject to further
editing and modification. The final
version will appear in the bound
volume of the official reports.
No. 2016AP1204-D
STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Harvey N. Jones, Attorney at Law:
Office of Lawyer Regulation, FILED
Complainant,
OCT 18, 2016
v.
Diane M. Fremgen
Clerk of Supreme Court
Harvey N. Jones,
Respondent.
ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney's license
revoked.
¶1 PER CURIAM. The Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR)
and Attorney Harvey N. Jones have filed a stipulation pursuant
to Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 22.12 that Attorney Jones' license
to practice law in this state should be revoked, as discipline
reciprocal to that imposed by the Minnesota Supreme Court.
After careful review of the matter, we approve the stipulation
and impose the stipulated reciprocal discipline. The OLR does
not seek the imposition of costs, and we do not impose costs.
No. 2016AP1204-D
¶2 Attorney Jones was admitted to practice law in
Wisconsin in August 1984. He was admitted to practice law in
Minnesota in 1974.
¶3 Attorney Jones' Wisconsin disciplinary history
consists of an administrative suspension on October 31, 2011 for
failure to pay State Bar dues, failure to comply with the OLR
trust account certification, and failure to comply with
continuing legal education requirements. His Wisconsin law
license remains suspended.
¶4 On July 31, 2013, the Minnesota Supreme Court
disbarred Attorney Jones based on the following violations:
• Count One: Jones' misappropriation of client and
non-client funds of at least $51,142.03 on at least 20
occasions over a period of 20 months was in violation
of Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.15(a), (c)(3) and (c)(4)
and 8.4(c).
• Count Two: Jones' repeated failure to respond to
requests for meetings and documentation by the
Director during the investigation and failure to file
a timely answer to the charges of unprofessional
conduct was in violation of Rule 25, RLPR and Minn. R.
Prof. Conduct 8.1(b).
• Count Three: Jones' failure to maintain subsidiary
client ledgers and monthly trial balances and failure
to perform monthly trust account reconciliations was
in violation of Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.15 and
Appendix 1 and Rule 9(a)(1), RLPR.
¶5 Attorney Jones did not notify the OLR of the Minnesota
disbarment within 20 days of its effective date.
¶6 On June 15, 2016, the OLR filed a two count complaint.
Count one alleged that by virtue of his Minnesota disbarment,
Attorney Jones should be subject to reciprocal discipline in
2
No. 2016AP1204-D
Wisconsin pursuant to SCR 22.22. Count two alleged by failing
to notify the OLR of his disbarment in Minnesota within 20 days
of the effective date of the imposition of such discipline,
Attorney Jones violated SCR 22.22(1).
¶7 On August 18, 2016, after the OLR's complaint had been
served on Attorney Jones but before a referee had been
appointed, Attorney Jones entered into a stipulation with the
OLR whereby he agreed that the facts alleged in the OLR's
complaint supported a revocation of his license to practice law
in Wisconsin as reciprocal discipline to that imposed by the
Minnesota Supreme Court.
¶8 Under SCR 22.22(3), this court shall impose the
identical discipline imposed in another jurisdiction unless one
or more of three exceptions apply. In his stipulation, Attorney
Jones states that he does not claim that any exception applies
to his case, and he agrees that this court should revoke his
license to practice to law in Wisconsin.
¶9 In the stipulation, Attorney Jones further avers that
the stipulation did not result from plea-bargaining, that he
does not contest the facts and misconduct alleged by the OLR or
the discipline sought by the OLR director, and that the facts
alleged in the complaint form a basis for the discipline
requested. Attorney Jones further represents that he fully
understands the misconduct allegations; fully understands the
ramifications should this court impose the stipulated level of
discipline; fully understands his right to contest the matter;
fully understands his right to consult with counsel; that his
3
No. 2016AP1204-D
entry into the stipulation is made knowingly and voluntarily;
and that the stipulation represents his decision not to contest
the misconduct alleged in the complaint or the level and type of
discipline sought by the OLR director.
¶10 After review of this matter, we accept the stipulation
and impose the identical discipline imposed by the Minnesota
Supreme Court, namely the revocation of Attorney Jones' license
to practice law in Wisconsin. Because this matter has been
resolved by means of a stipulation without the appointment of a
referee and the OLR has not requested the imposition of costs,
we do not impose any costs on Attorney Jones.
¶11 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Harvey N. Jones to
practice law in Wisconsin is revoked, effective the date of this
order.
¶12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent he has not
already done so, Harvey N. Jones shall comply with the
provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of a person whose
license to practice law in Wisconsin has been revoked.
¶13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that compliance with all
conditions of this ordered is required for reinstatement. See
SCR 22.28(3).
4
No. 2016AP1204-D
1