Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Patrick M. Cooper, 833 N.W.2d 88

Patrick M. Cooper, admitted 1993, faced an OLR complaint (42 counts) alleging neglect, failures to communicate, misrepresentations, failure to deliver files, practicing while suspended, and failing to cooperate with grievance investigations arising from nine client matters.
Cooper previously was the subject of a separate disciplinary proceeding (Cooper I) that resulted in a three-year suspension effective March 23, 2007, based on earlier misconduct that overlapped in time with the misconduct charged here.
Cooper initially denied the current allegations and raised a due‑process delay defense, but later entered a stipulation with the OLR withdrawing his answer and pleading no contest; the referee adopted the complaint allegations as factual findings.
The referee recommended a two‑year suspension retroactive to the expiration of Cooper’s prior suspension and assessment of costs; the parties jointly requested that outcome.
The Supreme Court adopted the referee’s factual findings, concluded Cooper committed all 42 counts, imposed a two‑year suspension retroactive to March 23, 2010, and ordered Cooper to pay the costs of the proceeding.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did Cooper commit professional misconduct as alleged?	OLR: complaint allegations establish violations across 42 counts.	Cooper: initially denied allegations; later stipulated and pled no contest.	Court adopted referee findings and held Cooper committed all 42 counts.
Appropriate discipline (length and retroactivity)?	OLR: two‑year suspension retroactive to prior suspension's end is appropriate given overlap and seriousness.	Cooper (via stipulation): agreed to two‑year retroactive suspension.	Court imposed two‑year suspension retroactive to March 23, 2010 (expiration of prior suspension).
Whether retroactive suspension is permissible here?	OLR: retroactivity fair because misconduct occurred during same period as earlier discipline.	Cooper: agreed; no separate opposition.	Court held retroactivity appropriate under prior precedent where misconduct predated earlier proceeding and license remained suspended.
Assessment of costs	OLR: full costs should be imposed given need for referee and litigation.	Cooper: no contest/stipulation but initially denied allegations, causing costs.	Court ordered Cooper to pay full costs of the proceeding within 60 days.

In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Cooper, 300 Wis. 2d 61, 729 N.W.2d 206 (2007) (prior disciplinary suspension against Cooper leading to three‑year suspension)
In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Haberman, 126 Wis. 2d 411, 376 N.W.2d 852 (1985) (two‑year suspension for extensive misconduct including neglect and failure to cooperate)
In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Woodard, 190 Wis. 2d 487, 526 N.W.2d 510 (1995) (one‑year suspension for failures to communicate, return files, and cooperate)
In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Kennedy, 119 Wis. 2d 261, 349 N.W.2d 483 (1984) (one‑year suspension for neglecting matters and failing to cooperate)
In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against and Reinstatement of Mandelman, 182 Wis. 2d 583, 514 N.W.2d 11 (1994) (discussing appropriate use of retroactive suspensions)
In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Widule, 261 Wis. 2d 45, 660 N.W.2d 686 (2003) (standard of independent review of discipline)
In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Inglimo, 305 Wis. 2d 71, 740 N.W.2d 125 (2007) (review standards for referee findings and conclusions)