Where attorney Carlos A. Gamino has met the requirements for reinstatement, reinstatement is proper.
“The court has carefully evaluated whether Attorney Gamiño has indeed met the requirements for reinstatement of his license to practice law in Wisconsin. We remain troubled by the very serious misconduct he committed and its impact on some vulnerable clients. Attorney Gamiño has been suspended twice and publicly reprimanded once in the last five years. His misconduct has included misrepresentation, improper sexual relationships with female clients in vulnerable personal situations, failure to act with reasonable diligence, failure to immediately refund unearned fees, contacting a client after receiving notice successor counsel had been retained, and a trust account violation. However, the referee was persuaded that Attorney Gamiño has met the requirements for reinstatement and we defer to a referee’s credibility determinations. Therefore, upon careful consideration of the entire record, we agree that Attorney Gamiño has met his burden of proof with respect to the elements necessary to justify reinstatement.”
2006AP2430-D OLR v. Gamino
Attorneys: For Appellant: Ganzer, Michael J., Milwaukee; Gamino, Carlos A., Wauwatosa; For Respondent: Weigel, William J., Madison