Quantcast
Home / Opinion / Professional Responsibility — public reprimand

Professional Responsibility — public reprimand

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Civil

Professional Responsibility — public reprimand

Where attorney Eva E. Ritter failed to place funds in her trust account and pay the party owed the funds, a public reprimand is appropriate.

“Here, we adopt the referee’s findings of fact. We also agree with the referee that those findings of fact support a legal conclusion that Attorney Ritter committed the first two counts of professional misconduct alleged by the OLR. We accept the referee’s conclusion——derived in part from his assessment of Attorney Ritter’s credibility, evidence of her serious medical issues, and the referee’s explicit finding that her medical condition caused the misconduct——that the OLR has failed to establish a violation of SCR 20:8.4(c) in this case. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Wood, 122 Wis. 2d 610, 363 N.W.2d 220 (1985). We agree with the referee that under the facts presented, a public reprimand is sufficient discipline in this case.”

2011AP1469-D OLR v. Ritter

Per Curiam.

Attorneys: For Complainant: Hendrix, Jonathan E., Madison; For Respondent: Mulligan, Thomas O., Spooner

Leave a Comment