Wisconsin 
  Lawyer
  Vol. 81, No. 8, August 
2008
Lawyer Discipline
The Office of Lawyer Regulation 
(OLR), an agency of the Wisconsin Supreme Court and component of the 
lawyer regulation system, assists the court in carrying out its 
constitutional responsibility to supervise the practice of law and 
protect the public from misconduct by lawyers. The OLR has offices at 
110 E. Main St., Suite 315, Madison, WI 53703; toll-free (877) 315-6941. 
The full text of items summarized in this column can be viewed at 
www.wicourts.gov/olr.
 
Disciplinary proceeding against Leroy Jones
On June 3, 2008, the Wisconsin Supreme Court suspended the law 
license of Leroy Jones, 
80, Milwaukee, for four months, effective July 7, 2008. In addition, the 
court ordered that 
Jones pay restitution in the form of interest to one client and pay the 
cost of the 
disciplinary proceeding. Disciplinary Proceedings Against 
Jones, 2008 WI 53.
     The suspension is based on Jones' misconduct in five matters. In 
the first matter, a 
client hired Jones to probate her mother's estate and to represent her 
in a guardianship matter. 
Jones failed to timely file an estate inventory, failed to appear at an 
order-to-show-cause 
hearing, and failed to appear at two guardianship hearings, all in 
violation of SCR 20:1.3. Jones 
failed to inform the client that he had not timely filed an estate 
inventory and that an 
order-to-show-cause hearing had been scheduled but that no one had 
appeared on her behalf at the 
hearing, in violation of former SCR 20:1.4(a). In violation of former 
SCR 20:1.16(d), Jones 
failed to timely refund any portion of the flat fee paid to him by the 
client despite the fact that 
he did not complete the representation. Finally, Jones failed to 
cooperate with the Office 
of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) district committee's investigation of this 
matter, eventually 
leading to the temporary suspension of his license, in violation of SCR 
21.15(4) and 22.03(6).
     In the second matter, a client hired Jones to represent her as 
the defendant in a 
personal injury case. Jones failed to take appropriate action in 
defending the client, including but 
not limited to failing to attend the plaintiff's deposition, in 
violation of SCR 20:1.3. 
Jones failed to inform the client of an upcoming mediation and its 
meaning, in violation of 
SCR 20:1.4(b). Jones also failed to inform the client of a settlement 
offer before accepting 
the offer, in violation of SCR 20:1.2(d). Finally, Jones made a 
misrepresentation to the 
client concerning action taken by the mediator, in violation of SCR 
20:8.4(c).
     A third client hired Jones to represent him in a child support 
matter. While no 
misconduct was found with regard to the representation, Jones failed to 
cooperate with the OLR's 
investigation of the matter in violation of 22.03(2).
     In the fourth matter, a client hired Jones to represent her in a 
small claims case. While 
no misconduct was found with regard to the representation, Jones failed 
to cooperate with the 
OLR district committee's investigation of the matter, in violation of 
SCR 21.14(5), 22.03(6), 
and 22.04(1). 
     In the fifth matter, Jones failed to timely notify his client 
and the courts, 
administrative agencies, and attorney for each party in a pending matter 
of his temporary suspension on 
or before the effective date of the suspension, in violation of SCR 
22.26(1)(a) and (c). 
Jones also failed to timely file a compliance affidavit, in violation of 
SCR 22.26(1)(e).
     As a condition of Jones' reinstatement, he must demonstrate that 
he has procedures in 
place to carry out his stated intention to limit his areas of practice.
     Jones has a lengthy disciplinary history. He was publicly 
reprimanded on July 2, 1984, 
June 26, 1990, May 30, 1991, Feb. 4, 1998, and Feb. 19, 2004. His 
license was suspended for 60 
days effective May 6, 1991. In 1992, his license was again suspended for 
60 days, retroactive to 
May 6, 1991. A third 60-day suspension was effective June 21, 1993. 
Top of Page 
Medical incapacity of Michael C. Hurt
On June 11, 2008, the Wisconsin Supreme Court adopted a stipulation 
between the OLR and 
the attorney-in-fact for Michael C. Hurt, 64, DuPont, Wash., formerly of 
Menomonee Falls, and 
indefinitely suspended Hurt's law license because of medical incapacity. 
The court, acting 
pursuant to SCR 22.34, found that Hurt currently suffers from a medical 
incapacity that 
substantially prevents him from performing the duties of an attorney.
     Hurt's law license has been suspended since 2007 for nonpayment 
of State Bar dues.
Top of Page 
  Reinstatement of Hazel J. Washington
On June 20, 2008, the Wisconsin Supreme Court reinstated the law 
license of Hazel J. 
Washington. Disciplinary Proceedings Against 
Washington, 2008 WI 66.
     The court had suspended Washington's law license for 18 months, 
retroactive to Feb. 3, 
2006 (the date that a summary suspension took effect), based on 
Washington's conviction on 
federal tax evasion charges. Six witnesses testified on Washington's 
behalf at the reinstatement 
hearing before a referee appointed by the court. Although the referee 
acknowledged that there 
were some issues with regard to Washington's reinstatement, including a 
failure to notify two 
clients of her suspension, a failure to list those clients on an 
affidavit submitted to the 
OLR, and some technical misstatements on her reinstatement 
questionnaire, the referee found 
that Washington had expressed genuine remorse for her wrongdoing and 
that the issues were not 
serious enough to prevent Washington from resuming the practice of law. 
The court adopted the 
referee's findings.
     Another issue of concern was Washington's failure to fully 
comply with trust 
account recordkeeping requirements. The court found that this problem 
did not require the denial 
of Washington's reinstatement petition, but the court conditioned 
reinstatement on 
Washington providing full trust account records for the OLR's review on 
a quarterly basis for two 
years. Washington also was ordered to pay the full cost of the 
proceeding. 
Top of Page 
Wisconsin 
Lawyer