Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Split court declines Fond du Lac lawyer’s petition for reinstatement

By: Michaela Paukner, [email protected]//February 11, 2021//

Split court declines Fond du Lac lawyer’s petition for reinstatement

By: Michaela Paukner, [email protected]//February 11, 2021//

Listen to this article

The Wisconsin Supreme Court declined to reinstate a Fond du Lac attorney found guilty of pocketing thousands of dollars worth of his firm’s legal fees.

The court released a 5-2 decision on Daniel Parks’ reinstatement petition on Thursday. Parks was suspended for 14 months starting in 2018 after his former law firm filed a complaint with the Office of Lawyer Regulation. The firm’s partners said Parks had been doing unauthorized legal work on the side, costing the firm at least $13,000 in lost fees.

Parks filed a petition for reinstatement in January 2020, which was opposed by the OLR. The OLR said it had learned of an action involving Parks’ insurance license, had concerns about his 2018 tax returns and took issue with his failure to reimburse his former firm and two clients.

A referee in the case concluded that the three issues should not preclude Parks’ reinstatement and recommended the state Supreme Court allow him to practice again.

The majority agreed that the insurance and tax issues should not affect the decision, but thought Parks’ failure to reimburse his former firm and clients reflected adversely on his conduct during his suspension.

The OLR did not seek restitution, and the court did not order it at the time of his suspension. At his reinstatement hearing, Parks said he hadn’t repaid the firm or the client because he hadn’t been ordered to do so and had heard neither ask for the money back.

While they were “not the most satisfying answers,” the referee felt this issue shouldn’t preclude Parks’ reinstatement. The high court, however, thought his explanation was inadequate.

“This omission also causes us to conclude that he has not demonstrated that he possesses the requisite moral character to practice law in this state,” the opinion said.

The justices said Parks’ failure to reimburse his former firm and clients caused them to reject his reinstatement petition. The court denied reinstatement and ordered Parks to pay the full costs of the proceeding, which totaled $6,370.43 as of July.

Parks may seek reinstatement as soon as he can demonstrate that he’s made restitution or settled all claims to those harmed by his actions. The state Supreme Court waived the usual nine-month waiting period to seek reinstatement again.

Justices Rebecca Bradley and Brian Hagedorn dissented. They said they would have granted his petition for reinstatement, though they did not elaborate on their reasoning.

Parks did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

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