Professional Responsibility — revocation

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Civil

Professional Responsibility — revocation

Where attorney Thomas E. Bielinski stole more than $500,000, revocation is appropriate.

“Supreme Court Rule 22.12 provides that if this court approves a stipulation it shall adopt the stipulated facts and conclusions of law and impose the stipulated discipline. We adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law to which the parties have stipulated regarding Attorney Bielinski’s professional misconduct. We further determine that revocation of Attorney Bielinski’s license to practice law is warranted. Attorney Bielinski has admitted to engaging in serious criminal conduct which consisted of an ongoing scheme to defraud the court and innocent parties solely to benefit himself financially. His misconduct lasted for approximately four years and involved at least 47 separate fraudulent transactions. Attorney Bielinski’s conduct caused serious harm to numerous persons, none of whom were his clients, as well as to the integrity of the court system. Revocation is the appropriate sanction. We accede to the recommendation that no costs be assessed against Bielinski.”

2012AP1654-D OLR v. Bielinski

Per Curiam.

Attorneys: For Complainant: St. Ores, Sheryl A., Madison; For Respondent: Bielinski, Thomas E., Appleton