Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / News / Dues diligence

Dues diligence

Late dues can lead to confusion over status

Racine attorney Lincoln K. Murphy poses Nov. 11 for a photo at his office. Murphy says that the State Bar of Wisconsin needs to be more consistent in identifying attorneys that are or are not suspended for failing to pay their dues on time. Staff photo by Kevin Harnack

Racine attorney Lincoln K. Murphy poses Nov. 11 for a photo at his office. Murphy says that the State Bar of Wisconsin needs to be more consistent in identifying attorneys that are or are not suspended for failing to pay their dues on time. Staff photo by Kevin Harnack

If Wisconsin attorneys fail to pay their bar dues by the Oct. 31 final deadline, the state bar website will show them as suspended – even if the bar hasn’t formally suspended them.

Attorneys can avoid being suspended for not paying their dues by the deadline if they pay before formal notification letter are sent to courts. If an attorney does so, they are not considered to be suspended. But the website automatically updates at the deadline to label each attorney that failed to pay on time as suspended. The result is that for as much as a week or more, the website reflects potentially inaccurate information about an attorney’s status.

Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Ellen R. Brostrom ran into the situation this year. Because of personal reasons, she was among those who paid late and she was briefly listed as suspended on the website.

But according to the bar, Brostrom was never actually suspended. Her payment was received on Nov. 3 – before notification letters went out – and her status on the website was updated the following day.

Brostrom said she would have preferred that the site accurately reflect her status, but she didn’t view it as a significant issue.

“I think the simple process of calling the State Bar to say ‘hey, is this accurate?’ would eliminate any confusion,” she said.

While Brostrom said she doesn’t think it’s a big issue, other attorneys say the bar needs to be more vigilant in making sure the website is accurate.

“The State Bar needs to clean up its act and not put suspensions up until it follows its own procedure of sending out notifications,” Racine attorney Lincoln K. Murphy said.

Hon. Ellen R. Brostrom

Hon. Ellen R. Brostrom

In an effort to provide more consistency, Murphy suggested that the bar take a more rigid approach for failure to pay dues, given that lawyers in essence have four months to cut a check prior to the threat of suspension.

“If you don’t pay by Nov. 1, you are automatically suspended,” he said. “The bar should just be consistent on that.”

Bar spokesman Tom Solberg said about 500 attorneys failed to pay their annual membership dues this year by the Nov. 1 deadline and were automatically listed as suspended on the State Bar of Wisconsin’s website. Historically, about half of those attorneys who fail to pay their dues by the final deadline do so prior to suspension notifications being sent to local courts, which usually happens 10 days or so after the deadline.

As long as they get their dues in before the suspension notifications go out, there appears to be little incentive for attorneys not to wait until the last minute to pay.

Invoices are mailed in May and due on July 1. Those who haven’t paid are sent a reminder during the first week of August with a notice that a $25 late fee will be imposed for those dues received after Sept. 1.

A final notice is mailed during the last week of September. It includes the late fee and notice that the member will be automatically suspended if payment is not received by Oct. 31, which this year fell on a Sunday, so the deadline was extended to Nov. 1.

Robert R. Henak

Robert R. Henak

Milwaukee attorney Robert R. Henak agreed that the bar has a responsibility to provide accurate information.

“That’s a problem,” Henak said. “It can have a significantly negative effect on a lawyer’s relationship with clients.”

Murphy agrees that it can have a negative effect on relations with clients. Even though it’s the attorney’s responsibility to pay on time, a suspension notice on the website can be a warning sign to clients.

“You get reminders,” Murphy said. “Is it then indicative of how you run your law practice and not get things done? If I was a potential client, I’d have concerns about whether that attorney can handle my case.”

According to Solberg, a “substantial” number of members pay their dues between July 1 and Oct. 31, and the organization has never received a complaint about a mislabeled suspension on the website.

“If they have paid, they are not suspended,” he said. “We treat it as timely until that letter goes out to judges, after which time a formal suspension takes effect.”

The website is updated daily to reflect payments, but Solberg conceded that there is a “lag” in the time between when the website may reflect a dues suspension and when it actually takes effect.

He said the bar recognizes the problem and could look into ways to provide better consistency, possibly through some additional notation for attorneys who are late in paying, but have not been suspended.

“I think the solution for most people would be to make a phone call to the bar,” Solberg said.

Solberg said the suspended label is a consequence of not paying bar dues on time and the best remedy is to cut a check prior to the threat of suspension.

Henak agreed that ultimately, the responsibility is on the attorney to decide whether or not they want to pay on time.

“I have no sympathy for people that end up getting suspended for that reason,” he said.

Brostrom said she has already taken steps to avoid any confusion as to her status next year.

She set up an auto reminder for June 25 on her electronic calendar.

“I don’t want to end up paying late dues again,” she said.

Jack Zemlicka can be reached at


  1. There is no reason that all members of the bar should not pay their dues and assessments on time. If a member has severe fiscal problems they can ask for a waiver. Those who do not pay place a greater burden on those who do. This is because the bar has to waste employee time and resources getting those who don’t pay to do so. With dues statements being mailed in May, that leaves 4-7 weeks to pay on time. Those who pay by October 31st are four months late. Perhaps the bar should post the names of all those who do not pay by the July 1st deadline on the front page of WisBar. Do those lawyers leave clients alone who don’t pay their invoices for four months after they are due? I seriously doubt it.

  2. This is called libel.

    The bar engages in any number of illegal activities regarding the collection of bar dues. For example, it lacks any authority whatsoever to assess or collect a late fee. Yet it does so, and like a bunch of sheep, most lawyers pay it.

    So now it has begun libelling lawyers by asserting that the lawyers lack a valid legal status in this state. It has absolutely NO authority to do so, and it is plain and simply a completely unfair collection practice.

    Nothing this bar association does would surprise me. It is small wonder so much of its membership does not want to be associated with it.

  3. I write to comment on the ‘late fee’ assessed by the State Bar. The State Bar has no inherent authority and must rely on authority delegated to it by the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Unlike the penalty authorized for late CLE reporting (SCR 31.03(2)) and the penalty for reinstatement following suspension for nonpayment of dues (SCR 10.03(6m)(a)), the State Bar has no authority to assess penalties for late payment of membership dues. The penalty for late payment is clear:

    SCR 10.03(6) Penalty for nonpayment of dues. If the annual dues or assessments of any member remain unpaid 120 days after the payment is due, the membership of the member may be suspended in the manner provided in the bylaws; and no person whose membership is so suspended for nonpayment of dues or assessments may practice law during the period of the suspension.

    The State Bar should petition the Supreme Court if it wishes to penalize its members in a manner not authorized under the SCR. The State Bar regularly petitions the Court, so this should not be burdensome.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *