Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Professional Responsibility — suspension


Professional Responsibility — suspension


Listen to this article

Wisconsin Supreme Court


Professional Responsibility — suspension

Where attorney Alan D. Eisenberg pursued a frivolous action, refused to timely pay sanctions, and entered an illegal fee-shifting agreement, a two-year suspension, consecutive to his revocation, is appropriate.

“Of great importance to this issue is the fact that this is the sixth time that Attorney Eisenberg has been the subject of professional discipline due to misconduct. Moreover, there is a recurring pattern of behavior and disregard for the rules that govern the privilege of practicing law in this state. This is not the first time that Attorney Eisenberg has been found to have commenced sham or frivolous litigation. It is also not the first time that he has provided false statements to the regulatory authorities investigating his conduct. Indeed, even during the course of this disciplinary proceeding, the referee found that Attorney Eisenberg had repeatedly changed his story on several issues in an apparent attempt to avoid discipline for his misconduct. The referee found that his claims were nothing more than fabrications. Further, as we noted above, the misconduct we have found in this case is serious and represents a flagrant misuse of the law and the position of attorney for self-serving ends. Finally, Attorney Eisenberg has not demonstrated an acceptance of responsibility or remorse for his misconduct. To the contrary, as the referee pointed out, he has attempted to place blame on everyone else, including the OLR’s counsel and the referee, and to minimize the seriousness of his misconduct. We therefore agree with the referee that our prior precedents and the particular facts of this case warrant imposing a two-year suspension, which shall run consecutive to the period of ineligibility required by the prior revocation of Attorney Eisenberg’s license to practice law in this state.”

2009AP284-D OLR v. Eisenberg

Per Curiam

Attorneys: For Appellant: Eisenberg, Alan D., pro se; For Respondent: Schwarzenbart, Paul W., Madison; Weigel, William J., Madison


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

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

Case Digests

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests