Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Professional Responsibility — public reprimand

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//June 29, 2012//

Professional Responsibility — public reprimand

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//June 29, 2012//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Civil

Professional Responsibility — public reprimand

Where attorney Joseph W. Weigel continued to use the name of a former partner in his firm name, after that partner left the firm, a public reprimand is appropriate.

“The referee found, and we agree, that when faced with losing the name of the firm’s founding member, Attorney Weigel entered into an agreement with another Mr. Eisenberg, Donald Eisenberg, to have a pretext for continuing to use Eisenberg in the firm’s name. Donald had no prior relationship with the firm and was not an employee, much less a shareholder, of the firm. This, coupled with advertising telling the public that ‘nothing had changed’ was misleading, and we agree with the referee’s conclusion that this conduct violated the aforementioned rules of professional conduct.”

“The referee recommended a 60-day suspension based on her findings and conclusion that the OLR had proved all three of the counts alleged in the disciplinary complaint. She noted this case included certain aggravating factors such as multiple violations, Attorney Weigel’s substantial experience in the practice of law, and Attorney Weigel’s refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing. The referee, quite properly, did not consider the prior discipline because it was remote in time. Upon our independent review of the record and the specific facts of this case, we are persuaded that a public reprimand is sufficient to achieve the goals of attorney discipline. Although we are persuaded a suspension is not necessary to protect the public and the judicial system in this instance, Attorney Weigel is admonished that a public reprimand should not be interpreted as indicating this court is untroubled by his misconduct. We conclude further that Attorney Weigel should be required to pay the full costs of this disciplinary proceeding, which are $17,447.28 as of January 20, 2012. No restitution was sought and none is ordered in this proceeding.”

2010AP1523-D OLR v. Weigel

Per Curiam.

Attorneys: For Complainant/Respondent: Schwarzenbart, Paul W., Madison; Sellen, Keith L., Madison; For Respondent/Appellant: Johnson, Terry E., Milwaukee; Weigel, Joseph W., Milwaukee; Anzelmo, Anthony Joseph, Madison; Sulton, William F., Milwaukee

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests