Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Robert Paul D'Arruda
2013 WI 90
| Wis. | 2013Background
- Robert Paul D'Arruda, a Milwaukee criminal defense lawyer admitted in 1993, faced a 14‑count disciplinary complaint by the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR); he admitted 10 counts by stipulation and contested others.
- Misconduct findings (by stipulation or referee): failure to provide required written fee explanations for clients H.A. and A.M.; mishandling/withholding of advanced fees (including failure to hold unearned fees in trust and to refund them when requested); failure to timely respond to OLR grievances; and failure to turn over a client's file to successor counsel (B.F.).
- In the matter of L.N., D'Arruda was charged with multiple violations including lack of diligence in advancing the case, failing to appear for some court dates, failing to communicate, failing to provide a final accounting/refund, and failure to timely respond to a grievance; he stipulated to some counts and contested others.
- The referee dismissed the OLR claim that D'Arruda failed to diligently pursue L.N.'s case (Count 5) but found violations for failure to comply with client communication rules, failure to refund unearned fees (ordered $250 restitution to L.N.), failure to turn over files, and failure to respond to grievances.
- The referee recommended a public reprimand (considering prior private reprimand, personal pressures at the relevant time, character testimony, and potential practice‑disrupting effects of suspension). The Supreme Court adopted the referee’s findings and imposed a public reprimand, $250 restitution to L.N., and full costs ($6,014.07 as of Sept. 4, 2013).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (OLR) | Defendant's Argument (D'Arruda) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to provide written fee basis/retainer explanation | D'Arruda did not give required written fee communications to clients H.A. and A.M. | Stipulated to these allegations for those clients | Violation of SCR 20:1.5(b)(1)–(2); misconduct admitted/accepted |
| Mishandling advanced/unearned fees; failure to refund | D'Arruda failed to hold unearned fees in trust and failed to refund $500 (and other unearned portions) on request | He repaid the Wisconsin Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection for one $500 payment and offered $250 to L.N.; contested some refund claims | Violations of SCR 20:1.15(b)(4) and SCR 20:1.16(d) for some clients; $250 restitution ordered to L.N.; Fund reimbursed one client and D'Arruda repaid Fund |
| Failure to respond/communicate with clients and to cooperate with OLR investigations | Repeated failures to promptly respond to client requests, to provide accounting, and to timely answer OLR grievances | For some events he explained scheduling conflicts or fax errors; contested some claims (e.g., communication delays in L.N. matter) | Violations of SCR 20:1.4(a)(4) (client communications) and SCR 22.03(2) enforceable via SCR 20:8.4(h) for failure to respond to grievances; some contested claims dismissed (e.g., Count 5) |
| Failure to turn over file to successor counsel | Did not deliver B.F.'s file/discovery after representation ended | Stipulated to facts | Violation of SCR 20:1.16(d); misconduct admitted/accepted |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Eisenberg, 269 Wis. 2d 43 (2004) (standard of review for referee findings and conclusions in disciplinary proceedings)
- In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Widule, 261 Wis. 2d 45 (2003) (Supreme Court may impose discipline independent of referee recommendation)