Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Justices adopt multijurisdiction petition

By: dmc-admin//May 5, 2008//

Justices adopt multijurisdiction petition

By: dmc-admin//May 5, 2008//

Listen to this article

After wrestling with a petition to clarify multijurisdictional practice in Wisconsin for almost two years, the state Supreme Court pinned down amendments to the Chapter 20 rules on April 24.

Specifically, the justices defined the circumstances that will not allow for a non-resident attorney to apply for temporary practice in the state.

The court revised aspects of SCR 20:5.5 and SCR 10.03(4) regarding the unauthorized practice of law and multijurisdictional practice to allow judges discretion when attorneys apply for pro hoc vice.

Rather than simply denying admission to someone who is disbarred or suspended for any reason, the justices indicated only attorneys suspended for disciplinary issues or for medical incapacitation, in addition to those disbarred, will be immediately denied.

Administrative suspensions for such things as failure to keep up with Continuing Legal Education [CLE] credits and dues in one of several states an attorney may be licensed to practice in, can be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

Chief Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson initially indicated she did not want anyone who is suspended or disbarred for any reason in another jurisdiction practicing in Wisconsin, but conceded she was in the minority.

“So you can thumb your nose at Minnesota CLE and we’ll take you as long as you have a licensed Wisconsin lawyer with you,” said Abrahamson during the discussion.

Justice Ann Walsh Bradley agreed with Abrahamson, but said that if attorneys happen to be licensed in several states and lapse in CLE in a state they no longer practice in, it should not be held against them.

“Let the trial courts decide,” said Bradley.

Justice N. Patrick Crooks used his daughter as an example of someone who might gain temporary admission in Wisconsin, even though she does not practice in the state. A graduate of UW Law School and a member of the bar, via the diploma privilege, she left the state and is licensed in Illinois, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

“She probably didn’t continue to pay her dues in Wisconsin,” said Crooks. “Are you really going to keep somebody like that from pro hoc vice?”

Abrahamson jokingly suggested Crooks just pay the dues and avoid the issue.

The justices settled on a $50 fee per case to be paid to the Office of Lawyer Regulation for pro hoc vice. According to Supreme Court Commissioner Julie Anne Rich, there will be a $250 fee payable to the Board of Bar Examiners for in-house counsel registration.

In addition, the court is considering a proposal that will allow registered in-house counsel to count their practice for purposes of reciprocity admission. The registration fee would be credited to the lawyer if the lawyer later applies for admission to the State Bar of Wisconsin.

A final draft of the revisions to SCR 20:5.5, SCR 10.03(4) and SCR 20:8.5 are expected to come before the court as early as May. The amended rules will take effect on Jan. 1, 2009.

Also Adopted

The court unanimously adopted, in principle, a petition to govern the use of videoconferencing in the courts, which could take effect on Jan. 1, 2009. In the petition, Director of State Courts A. John Voelker indicated that the creation of SCR 68 will allow the Supreme Court to utilize videoconferencing technology to the greatest extent possible consistent with the limitations of the technology, the rights of litigants and other participants in matters before the courts. As indicated in the petition, approximately 90 percent of the courthouses and jails in the state use videoconferencing.

The court also discussed changes to Wis. Stats. Ch. 756, regarding the governing and managing of juries in the circuit courts. The justices talked about broadening the jury pool list beyond the Wisconsin Department of Transportation lists which are currently used, but added a provision to revisit any adopted changes in 2012.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests